Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge Hunting Plan, with Compatibility

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge

Draft Hunting Plan April 2019

Photo Credit: George Gentry (USFWS)

Appendix A. Compatibility Determination Appendix B. Environmental Assessment Appendix C. Intra-Service Section 7 Evaluation

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge Hunting Plan

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 30 Wikis Way Chatham, MA 02633

Submitted By: Project Leader

______Signature Date

Concurrence: Refuge Supervisor

______Signature Date

Approved: Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System

______Signature Date

Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 II. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES ...... 3 III. DESCRIPTION OF HUNTING PROGRAM ...... 4 A. Areas to be Opened to Hunting ...... 4 B. Species to be Taken, Hunting Periods, Hunting Access ...... 4 C. Hunter Permit Requirements (if applicable) ...... 4 D. Consultation and Coordination with the State ...... 5 E. Law Enforcement ...... 5 F. Funding and Staffing Requirements ...... 6 IV. CONDUCT OF THE HUNTING PROGRAM ...... 6 A. Hunter Permit Application, Selection, and/or Registration Procedures ...... 6 B. Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations ...... 7 C. Relevant State Regulations ...... 8 D. Other Refuge Rules and Regulations for Hunting ...... 8 E. Access ...... 9 V. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ...... 9 A. Outreach for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program ...... 9 B. Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program ...... 9 C. How Hunters Will Be Informed of Relevant Rules and Regulations ...... 9 VI. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION ...... 10

Appendices Appendix A. Compatibility Determination…………………………………………………….A-1 Appendix B. Environmental Assessment………………………………………………………B-1 Appendix C. Intra-Service Section 7 Evaluation ………………………………………………C-1

List of Figures Figure 1.1. Aerial map of Monomoy NWR showing the Refuge Boundaries, Headquarters and Visitor Contact Station, and proposed waterfowl hunting area ….……………………………...11 Figure 2.2. Aerial map of Monomoy NWR, showing the Refuge boundaries, including the Monomoy Wilderness Boundary………………………………………………………………...12 Figure 3.3. Map of Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex, including Monomoy NWR……….13 Figure 4.4. Areas of Monomoy NWR Closed to Coyote Hunting……………………………….14

Hunting Plan – April 2019

MONOMOY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE HUNTING PLAN

I. INTRODUCTION

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) was established June 1, 1944 pursuant to a Declaration of Taking “… for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for other management purpose, for migratory birds” under authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. § 715d).

Throughout the initial designation process for the refuge, the Monomoy area was recognized as an “outstanding waterfowl area” and as “one of the finest shorebird beaches in North America” (Salyer 1938) and for the eelgrass (Zostera spp.) beds in shoal waters northwest of Inward Point on the Common Flats (Griffith 1938) that were described as “dense” beds in 1929 (Hotchkiss and Ekvall 1929). The biological values of this area helped define the refuge boundary.

The Declaration of Taking, which was implemented through a condemnation action, includes a detailed written description of an extensive western area containing upland, intertidal flats, and submerged lands and waters, as well as a map generally outlining those exterior limits and describing them as the “Limits of Area to be Taken.” The eastern boundary is the mean low water line and is ambulatory, meaning it moves as the mean low water line moves with accretion and erosion of the shoreline. This taking was approved by the District Court of the United States in February 1944 and took immediate effect on June 1, 1944, when it was filed in Federal court.

In 1970, Congress designated approximately 2,600 acres of land as wilderness to become part of the National Wilderness Preservation System, thereby preserving the wilderness character of the Monomoy Islands. The Monomoy wilderness extends to the mean low water mark, and the size of the wilderness area has changed over time as the Monomoy landform and surrounding intertidal lands have shifted.

With the designation of national wilderness at Monomoy, the original establishing purpose of the refuge — management and protection of migratory birds — was expanded to include management and protection of wilderness character and values.

Thus, in order to meet specific refuge and other broader U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) directives, the following purposes are established for Monomoy NWR:

• For lands acquired under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (16 U.S.C. §715- 715r), as amended, “…for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds….” (16 U.S.C. §715d) • “…to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.” (78 Stat. 890:16 U.S.C. 1121 (note), 1131-1136, Wilderness Act of 1964, as amended)

Monomoy NWR is managed as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), whose mission is “to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 1

Hunting Plan – April 2019

habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans” (Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997). The act requires that refuges restore and maintain the integrity, diversity, and environmental health necessary to achieve this mission and the purposes established for each refuge. Further, the act defines six wildlife-dependent uses that are to receive enhanced consideration on refuges: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation.

Monomoy NWR stretches for 8 miles off the elbow of Cape Cod in the Town of Chatham, Barnstable County, Massachusetts. This 7,898 -acre refuge includes South Monomoy, North Monomoy Island, Minimoy Island, 40 acres on Morris Island where the headquarters and visitor contact station are located (Figure 1.1), and all waters within the Declaration of Taking to a fixed line west of the islands. Nearly half (47 percent) the refuge, including most of refuge land above the mean low water (MLW) mark, is designated as a wilderness area, currently the only wilderness area in southern New England (Figure 1.2).

Monomoy NWR is one of eight refuges that make up the Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex (Refuge Complex), which is headquartered in Sudbury, Massachusetts (Figure 1.3). The barrier islands are part of a dynamic coastal zone, characterized by an ever-changing landscape. Salt and freshwater marshes, dunes, and ponds provide nesting, resting, and feeding habitat for migratory birds.

There is a long history of waterfowl hunting in the open waters off Monomoy Island. The Monomoy Branting Club of Boston was established near Shooter’s Island and Inward Point in 1862 as steam powered the industrial revolution and leisure time increased (Roscoe 1995, Phillips 1932). Atlantic brant was the principle game sought by club members in sink boxes (Deane 1885) each spring from 1863 through 1909, when spring brant hunting was abolished (Bent 1925, Phillips 1932). Fall sport hunting continued, but was generally less successful than spring hunting due to differing seasonal migration patterns (Bent 1925, Phillips 1932).

Today, waterfowl hunting occurs in the Chatham area and commercial guides advertise for waterfowl hunts around Monomoy, but none have requested a refuge permit to operate within the refuge. It is likely these commercial guides are not aware the refuge has never been opened for waterfowl or any other form of hunting. The actual numbers of commercial guides operating within the refuge, the number of waterfowl hunters that are being commercially guided, where or when they hunt, or what they harvest is unknown.

Coyotes are found abundantly throughout Massachusetts and on the refuge. Evidence of coyote on Monomoy NWR was first recorded in 1996 (USFWS 1997), and evidence of coyote denning has been observed in most years since 1998. Beginning in 1998, lethal coyote removal has been conducted to minimize depredation on nesting birds. The refuge has employed a variety of techniques that are outlined in appendix J of the refuge’s March 2016 Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP).

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 2

Hunting Plan – April 2019

Nauset/South Beach in November 2006, when staff observed a corresponding increase in mammal activity on South Monomoy Island. However, the February 2013 and April 2017 breaks in Nauset/South Beach appear to be limiting the number of coyotes and other mammalian predators observed by staff. As North Monomoy Island continues to expand northward toward Morris Island, it is possible that mammal populations may again increase. The refuge implements several strategies on an annual basis to reduce the number of predators on the refuge. Recreational coyote hunting is not meant to replace these targeted predator management programs, but may potentially support these efforts.

II. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

Hunting is a healthy, traditional recreational use of renewable natural resources deeply rooted in America’s heritage, and it can be an important wildlife management tool. The Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, the Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, other laws, and the Service’s policies permit hunting on a national wildlife refuge when it is compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and acquired.

Monomoy NWR’s CCP, published March 2016, identified the goal to “Provide the public with wildlife-dependent recreational, interpretive, and environmental educational opportunities to enhance awareness and appreciation of refuge resources and to promote stewardship of the wildlife and habitats of Monomoy NWR.” Furthermore, Objective 2.7 of the CCP stated that we would “Officially open up to 40 percent of the refuge within the Declaration of Taking to waterfowl hunting in accordance with Federal law and Massachusetts regulations.”

A variety of non-lethal and lethal management techniques to reduce impacts of predator and competitor species during different times of the breeding season have been implemented at the refuge. Lethal management of eastern coyotes is addressed within the “Predator and Competitor Management Plan” of the CCP (as appendix J).

The objectives of a waterfowl hunt and coyote hunt, on Monomoy NWR are to:

1. Provide the public with a high-quality recreational experience on refuge lands and increase opportunities and access for hunters; 2. Implement a hunt program that is safe for all refuge users; 3. Design a hunting program that is administratively efficient and manageable with existing staffing levels; and 4. Design a hunting program that aligns with refuge habitat management objectives.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 3

Hunting Plan – April 2019

III. DESCRIPTION OF HUNTING PROGRAM

A. Areas to be Opened to Hunting

The area of the refuge to be opened for waterfowl hunting will consist of open water habitat encompassing approximately 3,080 acres of the total 7,898 acre refuge (Figure 1.1). The area to be opened to coyote hunting will encompass approximately 7,250 acres of North and South Monomoy Islands (Figure 1.4). The coyote hunting area will comprise all of the lands above mean low water (MLW), which consist of tidal flat, salt marsh, and dune habitats, with the following exceptions:

(1) The Monomoy Light Keepers House, located on the southeast section of South Monomoy Island (Figure 1.4), is regularly used as housing for refuge staff, volunteers and researchers; therefore, it is considered to be an ‘Occupied Dwelling’ per Massachusetts Hunt Regulations. No hunting will be permitted within 500 feet of this building and associated oil shed. Larger safety zones may be established in the future if the safety of occupants becomes a greater concern. (2) Hunting is closed from the refuge boundary at the mean low water line to 400 feet inland of where the dune line meets the Atlantic-facing shoreline to protect the large population of seals found throughout these beaches and within the adjacent dune systems (Figure 1.4).

The hunting program on Monomoy NWR would be in accordance with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts hunting rules and regulations for waterfowl (duck, coot and geese) and coyote (except as noted above), Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and additional refuge-specific regulations. The refuge weighs a number of factors in opening an area to hunting or fishing, including safety considerations and limiting conflicts with ongoing research and management efforts. The refuge manager may, upon annual review of the hunting program, modify the program to ensure compatibility. Restrictions may occur if hunting becomes inconsistent with other priority refuge programs, endangers refuge resources or public safety.

B. Species to be Taken, Hunting Periods, Hunting Access

• MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING: Waterfowl (duck, goose and coot) hunting in accordance with specific Massachusetts State regulations is permitted on approximately 3,080 acres of certain open water portions of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exists. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. • COYOTE HUNTING: The refuge will be open for coyote hunting in accordance with specific Massachusetts State regulations on approximately 7,250 acres of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exists. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. Additional refuge-specific regulations would be in effect (see Section IV.B, below).

C. Hunter Permit Requirements (if applicable)

No refuge-specific permit will be required for this hunt. A valid Massachusetts hunting license is

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 4

Hunting Plan – April 2019

required. See section IV.B for refuge-specific regulations.

Commercial hunting guides would be required to obtain a special use permit from the refuge manager. All monies, minus administration costs, would be used to enhance the hunting program.

D. Consultation and Coordination with the State

National wildlife refuges, including Monomoy NWR, conduct hunting programs within the framework of state and federal regulations. All authorized hunts are at least as restrictive as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. By maintaining hunting regulations that are as restrictive as the state, individual refuges ensure that they are maintaining seasons which are supportive of management on a local and regional basis. The refuge has moved forward with developing this hunting plan based upon earlier formal coordination with MassWildlife as well as the intervening informal discussions. The results of this coordination are reflected in this plan.

Refuge Complex (including Monomoy NWR) staff will continue to consult and coordinate with MassWildlife annually to maintain regulations and programs that are consistent with the state, as well as to monitor populations of proposed hunt species and to set harvest goals. Refuge Complex and MassWildlife staff will also work together to ensure safe and enjoyable recreational hunting opportunities. Law enforcement officers from both agencies work together to conduct patrols, safeguard hunters and visitors, and protect both game and nongame species.

Over the past few years, much of the communication and coordination with the state has been through Regional leadership staff and has focused on increasing hunting and fishing opportunities on all Service lands within the commonwealth.

The refuge reviewed the operations and regulations for neighboring State wildlife management areas to find consistency where possible. Regional refuge leadership has been coordinating on a statewide level. The refuge first reached out to the State in the winter of 2019 to discuss this Hunting Plan, and we worked with the local State biologist and conservation officers early in the process. We will continue to consult and coordinate on specific aspects of the Hunting Plan. The State is in agreement with the refuge’s Hunting Plan, as it will help meet State objectives. Monomoy NWR will continue to work together with partners to ensure safe and enjoyable recreational hunting opportunities.

E. Law Enforcement

Federal and State officers work together to ensure safe and enjoyable recreational hunting opportunities. Law enforcement officers from both agencies work together to patrol, safeguarding hunters, visitors, and both game and nongame species. Enforcement of refuge violations associated with management of a national wildlife refuge is the responsibility of federally commissioned law enforcement officers. Other fish and wildlife officers, special agents, State conservation officers, and the local Sheriff’s Department occasionally assist Federal Wildlife Officers stationed at Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 5

Hunting Plan – April 2019

During the hunting seasons, the refuge will be patrolled regularly by both the Federal Wildlife Officer(s) and the State Environmental Police Officer(s) assigned to this part of the state. The frequency of patrols will be determined by hunter use, the level of compliance observed during patrols, and information obtained from participants, visitors, and other sources. If required, hunters will be checked in the field for compliance with regulations. Refuge brochures and increased signage will emphasize refuge specific regulations, safety considerations, and the protection of wildlife species found on the refuge. Regulations and maps will be posted on the Monomoy NWR website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/monomoy), on signs at the refuge entrance and available at the Complex headquarters, and will be provided upon request.

F. Funding and Staffing Requirements

Annual hunt administration costs for Monomoy NWR, including salary, equipment, law enforcement, maintenance of sites, and communication with the public will be approximately $5,150 annually and $22,500 for the first year due to the need for infrastructure and signage improvements. Refuge staff is funded from the Complex’s operational budget to support the hunt program. Costs associated with updating signage and maintaining access will be funded by the annual operating budget as well (visitor services and/or maintenance funds, as appropriate).

Table 1. Initial Costs of Hunting Programs at Monomoy NWR Activity Material Costs Labor Costs Total

Document Preparation $2,500 $5,000 $7,500 Posting/Signs $1,000 $1,500 $2,500 Administration $500 $1,500 $2,000 Outreach $1,500 $3,000 $4,500 Law Enforcement $1,500 $4,500 $6,000 Totals $7,000 $15,500 $22,500

Table 2. Annual Costs of Hunting Programs at Monomoy NWR Activity Material Costs Labor Costs Total

Document Preparation $100 $300 $400 Posting/Signs $100 $150 $250 Administration $200 $800 $1,000 Outreach $500 $500 $1,000 Law Enforcement $500 $2,000 $2,500 Totals $1,400 $3,750 $5,150

IV. CONDUCT OF THE HUNTING PROGRAM

A. Hunter Permit Application, Selection, and/or Registration Procedures

Refuge-specific hunting permits will not be required to hunt waterfowl or coyote on Monomoy NWR. Due to the remoteness of Monomoy Island and the anticipated low hunter participation,

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 6

Hunting Plan – April 2019 we feel it is not necessary to require hunters to obtain individual permits to hunt the Service- owned lands. Although the service will implement several specific regulations that differ from other parts of the state, they are not significant enough to warrant implementation of a permit system. There will be no limit to the number of hunters or guides allowed to participate in these hunts as participation is expected to be low.

Commercial hunting guides would be required to obtain a Special Use Permit (SUP) from the Refuge Manager and pay a fee. All monies minus administrative costs would be used to enhance the hunting program. As a condition of the SUP, guides would be required to report annually the number of hunters (parties), days hunted and number and species of game taken. Prior to hunting, coyote hunters would be required to inform the refuge manager by phone (508-945- 0594) the days and hours they will be hunting. All coyote hunters would also be required to report the number and location of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program.

All hunters must also possess all the required State and Federal licenses, stamps and permits and be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

Refuge specific hunt regulations and hunt unit maps (brochures) will be made available to hunters at kiosks, the refuge website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/monomoy) and at the Refuge Headquarters at 30 Wikis Way on Morris Island, Chatham, Massachusetts.

B. Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations

Refuge-specific regulations that pertain to hunting on Monomoy NWR are codified through a public process, and these regulations (50 CFR §32.40) may be modified on an annual basis as conditions change.

MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING: Waterfowl (duck, goose and coot) hunting in accordance with specific Massachusetts State regulations is permitted on approximately 3,080 acres of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exists. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. A special use permit and associated fee will be required for all commercial hunting guides. We allow the use of dogs for retrieving game.

COYOTE HUNTING: Coyote hunting is permitted on approximately 7,250 acres of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exist. A special use permit and associated fee will be required for all commercial hunting guides. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. The refuge will be open for coyote hunting in accordance to specific Massachusetts State regulations and subject to the following refuge-specific conditions:

● Hunting hours on the refuge will be ½ hour before sunrise until sunset. No night hunting will be permitted. This regulation is being imposed due to presence of up to 30,000 seals hauled out both inland and along beaches during winter months. There is a greater risk of hunters inadvertently harassing these marine mammals and even accidentally shooting one with a misplaced shot at a coyote during the night. The refuge also does not allow overnight camping. Additionally, access to the refuge and

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 7

Hunting Plan – April 2019

anchoring of boats is extremely difficult during daylight. Accessing the refuge at night will make it more dangerous for hunters and emergency responders. ● The refuge coyote hunt season would begin November 1 to protect the numerous field staff and ongoing research and management projects during the busy avian migration season in October. ● No hunting is permitted when seal research teams are operating on the refuge due to safety concerns. Researchers typically access the refuge for up to 12 days between late December and early February. Hunters would therefore be required to contact the refuge manager by phone (508-945-0594) or email ([email protected]) at least 2 days in advance of their proposed hunt date to ensure no researchers are operating on the islands. ● Hunters would be required to report the location(s) and number of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program. ● Use of dogs for coyote hunting will not be permitted.

C. Relevant State Regulations

Migratory Birds (Waterfowl) Migratory birds are managed through a Continent-wide cooperative effort with multiple agencies and partners, although ultimately the Service establishes the annual framework regulations (season length, bag limits, and framework dates). Framework regulations for various species, or guilds (e.g., ducks), are adjusted as needed based on established harvest strategies, population assessments, habitat conditions and productivity estimates. Results of the 2017 waterfowl assessment are found in the annual report (USFWS 2017). Individual states select migratory game bird hunting seasons within the Federal framework. The refuge follows all Federal regulations for migratory birds and season dates selected by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Furbearers (Coyote) The refuge has adopted Commonwealth of Massachusetts hunting regulations for coyote with the exception of the refuge-specific regulations listed above in Section IV.B.

D. Other Refuge Rules and Regulations for Hunting

To ensure compatibility with refuge purposes and the mission of the Refuge System, hunting must be conducted in accordance with State and Federal regulations, as supplemented by refuge- specific regulations (50 CFR Chapter 1 subchapter C). Refuge-specific stipulations are also detailed in the hunting Compatibility Determination (Appendix A).

● Refuge lands are closed to night hunting. Hunters are allowed on refuge lands 30 minutes before sunrise through sunset. • No coyote hunting from March 1 to October 31 • Mooring – Hunters are not permitted to use any refuge-owned mooring.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 8

Hunting Plan – April 2019

E. Access

Access to all refuge hunt units will be by boat. The anchoring and securing of boats is the full responsibility of the user and the Service will not be liable for lost or damaged equipment. The launching of boats and parking of vehicles will take place at local boat launches, harbors and marinas or from private residences, as the refuge does not own or operate a boat ramp.

V. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

A. Outreach for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program

The Refuge maintains a mailing list, for news release purposes, to local newspapers, radio, and websites. Special announcements and articles may be released in conjunction with hunting seasons. In addition, information about hunting on the refuge will be available at Complex headquarters or on the Monomoy NWR website.

Refuge staff will work directly with partners, especially, MassWildlife, to publicize the opening of this hunt program. Public Information meetings will be hosted by refuge staff as needed in Chatham.

B. Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program

During the extensive public review and comment period for the CCP, several comments were received expressing concern or opposition to the proposal to open the refuge to waterfowl hunting. Reasons cited included: concern over firearms and visitor public safety, concern that other wildlife might be disturbed by hunting (particularly shorebirds and raptors), and the feeling that hunting “does not promote sound ecological management” and does not “fall within the guidelines of protecting the wilderness resources.” One commenter was concerned that some waterfowl might be non-lethally injured by hunters and that harvested waterfowl might not always be retrieved. Another commenter requested that the proposal to allow waterfowl hunting receive further review and discussion. Similarly, the Association to Preserve Cape Cod wrote, “There appears to be no means of actively monitoring and managing the impacts of hunting on the protected resources…such monitoring should be integral to the overall management plan.” The Cape Cod Group of the Massachusetts Chapter of the Sierra Club acknowledged that hunting can occur on refuges and requested that future planning receive further review and discussion. Others, including the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game, supported waterfowl hunting.

No comments specific to coyote hunting were received during the CCP public review and comment period as the Service did not propose opening the refuge to coyote hunting at that time. However, we anticipate there may be some opposition to coyote hunting from anti-hunting organizations.

C. How Hunters Will Be Informed of Relevant Rules and Regulations

General information regarding hunting and other wildlife-dependent public uses can be obtained at Monomoy NWR headquarters at 30 Wikis Way, Chatham, MA 02633, or by calling (508)

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 9

Hunting Plan – April 2019

945-0594. Dates, maps, directions, and permit requirements about the hunt will be available on the station website at: https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Monomoy/visit/visitor_activities.html

VI. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION

Hunting and all associated program activities proposed in this plan are compatible with the purposes of the refuge. See attached Hunting Compatibility Determination (appendix A).

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 10

Hunting Plan – April 2019

Figure 5.1. Aerial map of Monomoy NWR showing the Refuge Boundaries, Headquarters and Visitor Contact Station, and area to be opened to Waterfowl Hunting

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 11

Hunting Plan – April 2019

Figure 6.2. Aerial map of Monomoy NWR, showing the Refuge boundaries, including the Monomoy Wilderness Boundary

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 12

Hunting Plan – April 2019

Figure 7.3. Map of Eastern Massachusetts National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) Complex, including Monomoy NWR (Outlined by red box)

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 13

Hunting Plan – April 2019

Figure 8.4. Areas of Monomoy NWR Closed to Coyote Hunting

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge 14

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION

USE: Hunting

REFUGE NAME: Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge

DATE ESTABLISHED: June 1, 1944

ESTABLISHING AND ACQUISITION AUTHORITIES:

Migratory Bird Conservation Act {16 U.S.C. 715d}

PURPOSE FOR WHICH ESTABLISHED:

“…for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” (16 U.S.C. § 715d).

“…wilderness areas…shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such a manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness. (P.L. 88-577 §2(a), Wilderness Act; as referenced in P.L. 91-504 § 1(g), An Act to Designate Certain Lands as Wilderness).

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM MISSION:

“The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) is to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans” (Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57).

DESCRIPTION OF USE:

(a) What is the use? Is the use a priority public use? The use is public hunting of waterfowl (ducks, geese, and coots) and coyote on Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge). Hunting was identified as one of six priority public uses of the Refuge System by the Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57), when found to be compatible.

(b) Where would the use be conducted? The approximate area we propose to open to waterfowl hunting is presented in Figure 1.1.

The area of the refuge open for waterfowl hunting will consist of open water habitat

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-1

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

encompassing approximately 3,080 acres of the total 7,898 acre refuge. The area open to coyote hunting will encompass approximately 7,250 acres of North and South Monomoy Islands (Figure 1.4). The coyote hunting area will comprise all of the lands above mean low water (MLW), which consist of tidal flat, salt marsh, and dune habitats, with the following exceptions:

(2) Hunting is closed from the refuge boundary at the mean low water line to 400 feet inland of where the dune line meets the Atlantic-facing shoreline to protect the large population of seals found throughout these beaches and within the adjacent dune systems.

(c) When would the use be conducted? Offshore duck, goose and coot hunting seasons and hours would follow applicable State of Massachusetts regulations. Coyote hunting would follow State regulations, except that hunting hours would end at sunset, and hunting in October would be prohibited in the interest of staff safety during peak shorebird migration season and concurrent field research and management projects. In October, numerous staff and partners are active throughout the Refuge banding birds, conducting surveys, and removing field season gear. Hunting during this period would pose safety concerns to these individuals and disrupt research efforts.

Coyote hunting would also be prohibited when seal research crews are operating on South Monomoy Island, for up to 12 days in the winter months.

(d) How would the use be conducted? The hunt program on Monomoy NWR would be in accordance with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts hunting rules and regulations for waterfowl (duck, coot and geese) and coyote (except as noted above), federal regulations, and additional refuge-specific regulations. The refuge weighs a number of factors in opening an area to hunting or fishing, including safety considerations and limiting conflicts with ongoing research and management efforts. The refuge manager may, upon annual review of the hunting program, modify the program to ensure compatibility. Restrictions may occur if hunting becomes inconsistent with other priority refuge programs, endangers refuge resources or public safety.

Commercial Hunting Guides would be required to obtain a Special Use Permit (SUP) from the Refuge Manager and pay a processing fee. As a condition of the SUP, guides would be required to report annually the number of hunters (parties), days hunted and number and species of game taken.

Hunters would be required to contact the refuge manager by phone (508-945-0594) or email ([email protected]) at least 2 days in advance of their proposed hunt date to ensure no

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-2

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

researchers are operating on the islands. Hunters would be required to report the location(s) and number of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program.

Access to all refuge hunt units is by boat and the refuge would not provide moorings. The anchoring and securing of boats is the full responsibility of the user and the Service will not be liable for lost or damaged equipment. The launching of boats and parking of vehicles will take place at local boat launches, harbors and marinas or from private residences, as the refuge does not own or operate a boat ramp.

(e) Why is this use being proposed? Hunting is one of the priority public uses outlined in the Refuge Improvement Act. The Service supports and encourages priority uses when they are compatible on National Wildlife Refuges. Hunting is an important wildlife management tool and a traditional form of wildlife-oriented recreation deeply rooted in America’s heritage.

Monomoy NWR’s CCP, published in March of 2016, identified the goal to “Provide the public with wildlife-dependent recreational, interpretive, and environmental educational opportunities to enhance awareness and appreciation of refuge resources and to promote stewardship of the wildlife and habitats of Monomoy NWR.” Furthermore, Objective 2.7 of the CCP stated that staff would “Officially open up to 40 percent of the refuge within the Declaration of Taking to waterfowl hunting in accordance with Federal law and Massachusetts regulations.”

In addition to expanding recreational opportunities, coyote hunting may provide beneficial resource management objectives. A variety of non-lethal and lethal management techniques to reduce impacts of predator and competitor species during different times of the breeding season have been implemented at the refuge. Lethal management of eastern coyotes is addressed within the “Predator and Competitor Management Plan” of the CCP. Opening the refuge to coyote hunting is not meant to replace predator management control programs on Monomoy NWR. We anticipate the net benefits to species under federal and state endangered species acts to be minimal, as the coyote hunt program takes place outside of the bird nesting season and coyotes routinely repopulate the refuge from the mainland.

AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES:

There are sufficient funds within the refuge’s annual operating budget to administer the hunting program. Annual hunt administration costs for Monomoy NWR, including salary, equipment, law enforcement, maintenance of sites, and communication with the public will be approximately $5,150 annually and $22,500 for the first year due to the need for infrastructure and signage improvements. Costs associated with updating signage and maintaining access will be funded by the annual operating budget. The issuance of Special Use Permits to guides may generate additional revenue.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-3

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

Table 1. Initial Costs of Hunting Programs at Monomoy NWR Activity Material Costs Labor Costs Total

Table 2. Annual Costs of Hunting Programs at Monomoy NWR Activity Material Costs Labor Costs Total

Document Preparation $100 $300 $400 Posting/Signs $100 $150 $250 Administration $200 $800 $1,000 Outreach $500 $500 $1,000 Law Enforcement $500 $2,000 $2,500 Totals $1,400 $3,750 $5,150

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS OF THE USE:

Hunting provides wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities that can foster a better appreciation and understanding of wildlife and their habitat, which can translate into stronger support for the refuge, the Refuge System, the Service, and wildlife conservation in general.

Overall, we anticipate an average of two waterfowl hunters per day, and one coyote hunter per month. Using the 2018/2019 hunting season as a guide (November 19 to January 26), there were a total of 58 hunting days (as no hunting is allowed in Massachusetts on Sundays, thus all Sundays have been subtracted). Therefore, we estimate approximately 116 hunt visits per year for waterfowl, and 4 to 5 hunt visits per year for coyote. According to local experts and the professional judgement of refuge staff, this would result in an estimated waterfowl harvest (duck, goose, and coot) of 232 mixed-species harvested per year (2 harvested/visit x 116 visits = 232), and one coyote per year.

Vegetation Possible negative effects of recreational hunting may include vegetation trampling. Most coyote hunting occurs during the fall, but we do not anticipate many coyote hunters and therefore do not anticipate substantial hunter-related negative effects on vegetation. Further, coyote hunt seasons extend into winter when plants are dormant. For these reasons, cumulative impacts to plant communities are not likely to be substantial during either the fall or winter hunting seasons.

Soils We anticipate that hunting on the refuge will have minor impacts to soils. Soils can be compacted and/or eroded due to repeated foot traffic, especially in wetland habitats. The potential for soil erosion will vary during the year based on soil moisture and temperatures. At

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-4

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

the anticipated use levels, and because hunters tend to disperse when searching for game, impacts to soils (erosion and compaction) are not likely to be significant.

Hydrology (Water Resources and Wetlands) Monomoy NWR contains freshwater and saltwater wetland habitats including salt marsh, intertidal flats, and ponds. The waters of Monomoy NWR, including waters in and adjacent to the Cape Cod National Seashore are classified as marine waters Class SA or freshwaters Class B (MA DEP 2002). Big and Little Station Ponds are 32-acre and 11-acre freshwater ponds, respectively, on South Monomoy Island. Other small freshwater ponds and wetlands are present on South Monomoy Island. Most are natural, but a few lie in depressions excavated by the Service in the early 1950s in an effort to increase waterfowl habitat. Almost 25 acres of salt marsh surround the 5-acre estuarine Hospital Pond at the northern end of South Monomoy Island. Powder Hole, which in the mid-1800s was a deep and extensive harbor, is now a shallow estuarine water body on the southwest end of the refuge. These habitats are located throughout the hunt area.

Impacts to water resources are possible, as motorboats are required to access all hunt areas and inadvertent discharge of pollutants could occur.

While boating and fishing are already very popular within the waters around Monomoy, opening migratory bird and coyote hunting areas could result in some additional impacts from increased boat use and use of beach landings during the winter months, when visitation has typically been very low. However, due to its isolated location, marine environment, and challenging visitor access conditions, particularly in winter, we do not anticipate that use levels would be high enough to cause anything but minor, temporary impacts.

Wildlife In general, refuge visitors engaged in coyote hunting will be walking off-trail in designated areas open to hunting. General disturbance from recreational activities, including hunting, vary with the wildlife species involved and the activity’s type, level, frequency, duration, and the time of year it occurs. The responses of wildlife to human activities, such as hunting, include avoidance or departure from the site (Owen 1973, Burger 1981, Kaiser and Fritzell 1984, Korschen et al. 1985, Kahl 1991, Klein 1993, Whittaker and Knight 1998), the use of suboptimal habitat (Erwin 1980, Williams and Forbes 1980), altered behavior or habituation to human disturbance (Burger 1981, Korschen et al. 1985, Morton et al. 1989, Ward and Stehn 1989, Havera et al. 1992, Klein 1993, Whittaker and Knight 1998), attraction (Whittaker and Knight 1998), and an increase in energy expenditure (Morton et al. 1989, Belanger and Bedard 1990). The amount of disturbance tends to increase with decreased distance between visitors and birds (Burger 1986).

While some disturbance to non-target wildlife species is expected, we anticipate this to be minimal, due to low numbers of participants and the fact that most of the hunting for coyotes will begin November 1 and will occur outside the breeding season and peak migration times for many species. Due to the location of the waterfowl hunting area, all hunters will hunt from offshore boats, thereby limiting disturbance to wintering and migratory birds on the shoreline, flats and marshlands.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-5

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

Migratory Birds Migratory birds are managed on a flyway basis and hunting regulations are established in each state based on flyway data. The Atlantic Flyway Council and Commonwealth of Massachusetts regulations would apply (except as noted above). Hunting migratory birds on the refuge would reduce the total numbers of birds in the flyway, but harvest would be within allowable limits as determined by State and Federal agencies. As noted above, we estimate a total of 232 waterfowl taken per year. Hunting may make waterfowl more prone to disturbance, reduce the amount of time spent foraging and resting, alter habitat usage patterns, and disrupt pair and family bonds (Raveling 1979, Owen 1973, White-Robinson 1982, Madsen 1985, Bartelt 1987).

Disturbance to non-target birds and resident wildlife would likely occur from hunting and associated hunter activity, but would be short-term and temporary. Overall, the effects on migratory birds are expected to be minimal due to the low anticipated number of hunters on refuge lands and waters.

Federally listed species A Section 7 analysis under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1536) of 1973 was conducted in cooperation with the Service’s New England Field Office for federally listed species, including piping plover (Charadrius melodus), roseate tern (Sterna dougallii), northeastern beach tiger beetle (Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis) red knot (Calidris canutus rufa), and seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus). Hunting will have no effects on each of the aforementioned listed bird species, as there will be no temporal overlap between hunters and these species. Confirmed seabeach amaranth habitat will be posted as closed to all public entry, so we expect no adverse effects to this species if hunters abide by posted closures. The northeastern beach tiger beetle requires open beach habitat free from heavy vehicle or pedestrian traffic. The presence of hunters would not markedly increase sand compaction rates to adversely affect this species.

One of the refuge’s objectives is to maximize production of Federally-listed bird species through reducing depredation and human disturbance. Several measures are in place to protect these birds, from public education to seasonal closures.

Seals Throughout the winter and spring months, gray seals, and to a lesser extent harp and harbor seals, depend upon the refuge as a critical resting, pupping and/or haul-out site. Tens of thousands of seals occupy about 5.5 miles of Atlantic-facing refuge shoreline, from the South Tip of South Monomoy Island to the connection with South Beach. From late December through early March, nursing gray seal pups and their mothers are also located throughout the interior dune systems adjacent to the ocean beach. By Federal law (Marine Mammal Protection Act, MMPA), it is illegal to harass, feed, hunt, capture, collect, or kill any marine mammal or part of a marine mammal. It is also required to maintain a distance of at least 150 feet from any marine mammal. Given that Monomoy gray seals routinely flush into the water when they observe people at a much closer range than 150 feet, the entire eastern shoreline and adjacent dune systems would effectively be closed to hunting (and all other public uses) when seals are present.

As refuge visitation is irregular and inconsistent during the winter months, grey seals have

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-6

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

become accustomed to Monomoy being relatively free from anthropogenic disturbance; that is, they are not habituated to humans, as many are during the summer months when they depart Monomoy and inhabit the coastal waters throughout Cape Cod. Therefore, the presence of even a small number of coyote hunters may cause increased stress behaviors in the over-wintering seal populations of Monomoy. In addition to the potential for physiological stress response, large numbers of hauled-out seals have been known to flush en masse when disturbed at the refuge and at other sites, causing the potential for trampling, particularly of pups.

Waterfowl hunters also must be mindful of the presence of seals while hunting offshore of the refuge, both in the water and when in proximity to the southern tip of South Monomoy Island where seals may be hauled out.

Other Visitors and Users The refuge is currently open to five of the six priority public uses (fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, environmental education and environmental interpretation). About 46,156 visitors access the refuge each year, including 13,109 to the Visitor Center; 42,960 for wildlife observation; and 8,601 for fishing, among other users. Hunting on the refuge will take place in designated areas that are open to all other public uses; however, hunting would be taking place at times of the year when visitor use is much lower. Therefore, impacts to other visitor uses and experiences are anticipated to be minimal.

Economic The Town of Chatham has a very long hunting and fishing history, and maintaining a vibrant fishing industry in particular is important to the Town. Chatham is a tourist destination because of its scenic beauty, beaches, seals, and its vibrant and artistic downtown.

The visitor contact station on Morris Island is accessible by car. North and South Monomoy Islands, the majority of which are designated as wilderness, are accessible by ferry or private boat. The refuge is open year-round, with most visitation occurring during the summer tourist season from late spring to early fall. The refuge offers wildlife viewing sites, hiking trails, and extensive fishing opportunities.

Most refuge visits, especially those to the Monomoy Islands, occur between May and October, peaking in summer. Monomoy NWR provides wildlife habitat, and also provides visitors with opportunities to enjoy a variety of wildlife-dependent recreational and educational activities. Opening the refuge to hunting may provide a minor economic benefit, particularly over the winter months when fewer programs exist for the local population and fewer tourists visit.

Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts result from incremental impacts of a proposed action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. While cumulative impacts may result from individually minor actions, they may, viewed as a whole, become substantial over time. The hunt program has been designed to be sustainable through time given relatively stable conditions, particularly because of close coordination with MassWildlife.

The cumulative impacts of hunting on coyote and waterfowl populations at the refuge are

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-7

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

expected to be negligible (i.e., 232 waterfowl, and 1 coyote, estimated to be harvested per year). The proportion of the refuge’s harvest of these species is negligible when compared to local, regional, and statewide populations and harvest.

We anticipate that expanding hunting opportunities at the refuge will result in no direct or indirect cumulative impacts on resident or migratory wildlife, because of: (1) the Service’s regulatory process for harvest management, (2) hunting seasons occurring largely outside of the breeding seasons for resident and migratory wildlife, and (3) the ability to adapt refuge-specific hunting regulations to changing local conditions.

PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT:

This Compatibility Determination (CD) is part of the Monomoy NWR Hunting Plan and the accompanying Environmental Assessment (EA). Public notification and review of this CD will include a 30-day comment period. We will inform the public through local venues, the refuge website, and social media. Comments received from the public will be considered, and modifications may be incorporated into the final plan and decision documents.

DETERMINATION (CHECK ONE):

Use is not compatible.

X Use is compatible with the following stipulations

STIPULATIONS NECESSARY TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY: • Hunting hours on the refuge will be ½ hour before sunrise until sunset. No night hunting will be permitted. • The refuge coyote hunt season would begin November 1 to protect the numerous field staff and ongoing research and management projects during the busy avian migration season in October. • No hunting is permitted when seal research teams are operating on the refuge due to safety concerns. Hunters would therefore be required to contact the refuge manager by phone or email at least 2 days in advance of their proposed hunt date to ensure no researchers are operating on the islands. • Hunters would be required to report the location(s) and number of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program. • Use of dogs for coyote hunting will not be permitted. • All guides are required to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct business on the refuge. Monitoring this use through special use permits is necessary per federal code. • Carts or other wheeled equipment may not be used within the wilderness area on North Monomoy Island and South Monomoy Island.

JUSTIFICATION:

Hunting is a priority wildlife-dependent use for the Refuge System through which the public can

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-8

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife. The refuge facilitates opportunities for wildlife- dependent recreation when compatible and consistent with sound fish and wildlife management, and ensure that they receive priority consideration during planning and management. Hunting satisfies a recreational need, but hunting on national wildlife refuges can be an important, proactive management action that can prevent overpopulation and the deterioration of habitat. Disturbance to other species may occur, but this disturbance is generally short-term and low-impact. Suitable habitat exists on refuge lands to support hunting as proposed.

We do not expect this activity to conflict with any other priority public uses or adversely affect biological resources. The use will not cause an undue administrative burden. We will manage the use in accordance with State and Federal regulations, as well as refuge-specific regulations and general operations to ensure that wildlife and habitat management goals are achieved, and that the use is providing a safe, high-quality experience for participants. Annual adjustments can be made to the use or any of its components to ensure its continued compatibility. Therefore, through this compatibility determination process, we have determined that hunting on Monomoy NWR, in accordance with the stipulations provided above, is a compatible use that will not materially interfere with, or detract from, the fulfillment of the Refuge System mission or the purposes of the refuge.

SIGNATURE: Refuge Manager ______(Signature) (Date)

CONCURRENCE: Regional Chief ______(Signature) (Date)

MANDATORY 15 YEAR RE-EVALUATION DATE: ______(Date)

REFERENCES:

Bartelt, G.A. 1987. Effects of disturbance and hunting on the behavior of Canada geese family groups in East Central Wisconsin. Journal of Wildlife Management, 51, 517-522.

Belanger, L. and Bedard, J. 1990. Energetic cost of man-induced disturbance to staging snow geese. Journal of Wildlife Management, 54, 36-41.

Burger, J. 1981. Effect of human activity on birds at a coastal bay. Biological Conservation 21, 231-241.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-9

Appendix A – Compatibility Determination

Burger, J. 1986. The effect of human activity on shorebirds in two coastal bays in northeastern United States. Biological Conservation, 13, 123-130.

Erwin, R.M. 1980. Breeding habitat by colonially nesting water birds in two Mid-Atlantic U.S. regions under different regimes of human disturbance. Biological Conservation, 18, 39-51.

Havera, S.P., Boens, L.R., Georgi, M.M., and Shealy, R.T. (1992). Human disturbance of waterfowl on Keokuk Pool, Mississippi River. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 20, 290-298.

Kahl, R. 1991. Boating disturbance of canvasbacks during migration at Lake Poygan, Wisconsin. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 19, 242-248.

Kaiser, M.S. and Fritzell, E.K. 1984. Effects of river recreationists on green-backed heron behavior. Journal of Wildlife Management, 48, 561-567.

Klein, M.L. 1993. Waterbird behavioral responses to human disturbance. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 21, 31-39.

Korschen, C.E., George, L.S., and Green, W.L. 1985. Disturbance of diving ducks by boaters on a migrational staging area. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 13, 290-296.

Madsen, J. 1985. Impact of disturbance on field utilization of pink-footed geese in West Jutland, Denmark. Biological Conservation, 33, 53-63.

Morton, J. M., Fowler, A. C., and Kirkpatrick, R. L. 1989. Time and energy budgets of American black ducks in winter. Journal of Wildlife Management, 53, 401-410 (also see corrigendum in Journal of Wildlife Management, 54, 683.

Owen, M. 1973. The management of grassland areas for wintering geese. Wildfowl, 24,123-130.

Raveling, D.G. 1979. Traditional use of migration and winter roost sites by Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management, 43, 229-235.

Ward, D.H. and Stehn, R.A. 1989. Response of brant and other geese to aircraft disturbance at Izembek Lagoon, Alaska. Anchorage, AK: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Fish and Wildlife Research Center. Final report to the Minerals Management Service.

White-Robinson, R. 1982. Inland and saltmarsh feeding of wintering brent geese in Essex. Wildfowl, 33, 113-118.

Whittaker, D. and Knight, R. 1998. Understanding wildlife responses to humans. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 26(3), 312-317.

Williams, G.J. and Forbes, E. 1980. The habitat and dietary preferences of dark-bellied brant geese and widgeon in relation to agricultural management. Wildfowl, 31, 151-157.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge A-10

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Environmental Assessment for Hunting at Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge

Date: March 20, 2019

This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the impacts associated with this proposed action and complies with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500-1509) and Department of the Interior (516 DM 8) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) (550 FW 3) policies.

Proposed Action: The Service is proposing to allow public hunting opportunities for waterfowl and coyote on Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) in accordance with the refuge’s Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) (Service 2016). Monomoy NWR stretches for 8 miles off the elbow of Cape Cod in the Town of Chatham, Barnstable County, Massachusetts. This 7,898-acre refuge includes South Monomoy Island, North Monomoy Island, Minimoy Island, and 40 acres on Morris Island where the headquarters and visitor contact station are located. We propose to open 3,080 acres of the refuge to waterfowl (i.e., ducks, geese, and coots) hunting, and open approximately 7,250 acres of lands above mean low water (MLW) on North and South Monomoy Islands to coyote hunting.

This proposed action is iterative and may evolve over time during the process as we refine the proposal and learn more from the public, tribes, and other agencies. Therefore, the final proposed action may be different from the original. The final decision on the proposed action will not be made until after conclusion of the public comment period for the EA.

Background: National wildlife refuges are guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), the purposes of an individual refuge, Service policy, and laws and international treaties. Relevant guidance includes the Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, and selected portions of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and Service Manual.

The refuge was established June 1, 1944 pursuant to a Declaration of Taking “… for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for other management purpose, for migratory birds” under authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. § 715d). With the designation of national wilderness at Monomoy NWR in 1970, the original establishing purpose of the refuge — management and protection of migratory birds — was expanded to include management and protection of wilderness character and values “…to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.” (78 Stat. 890:16 U.S.C. 1121 (note), 1131-1136, Wilderness Act of 1964, as amended).

The mission of the Refuge System, as outlined by the Refuge System Administration Act (Refuge System Administration Act), as amended by the Refuge System Improvement Act (16

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-1

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), is to:

“... to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”

The Refuge System Administration Act mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering the System to: • Provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System; • Ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans; • Ensure that the mission of the Refuge System described at 16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2) and the purposes of each refuge are carried out; • Ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the States in which the units of the Refuge System are located; • Assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge; • Recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general public uses of the Refuge System through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife; • Ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife- dependent recreational uses; and • Monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge.

Therefore, it is a priority of the Service to provide for wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities, including hunting and fishing, when those opportunities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and the mission of the Refuge System.

We know that there is a long history of waterfowl hunting in the open waters off Monomoy Island. Today, waterfowl hunting occurs in the Chatham area and commercial guides advertise waterfowl hunts around Monomoy, but none have requested a refuge permit to operate within the refuge. It is likely these commercial guides are not aware the refuge has never been opened for waterfowl or any other form of hunting. The actual numbers of commercial guides operating within the refuge, the number of waterfowl hunters that are being commercially guided, where or when they hunt, or what they harvest is unknown.

Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action: Hunting is a healthy, traditional recreational use of renewable natural resources deeply rooted in America’s heritage, and it can be an important wildlife management tool. The Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, the Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, other laws, and the Service’s policies permit hunting on a national wildlife refuge when it is compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and acquired.

National wildlife refuges, including Monomoy NWR, conduct hunting programs within the

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-2

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

framework of state and federal regulations. All authorized hunts are at least as restrictive as the State of Massachusetts. By maintaining hunting regulations that are as, or more, restrictive than the state, individual refuges ensure that they are maintaining seasons which are supportive of management on a local and regional basis. Hunters on the refuge are expected to be ethical hunters and respectful of other hunters, non-consumptive users, wildlife species, and the environment while on refuge lands.

The objective of the Monomoy NWR hunting program is to:

• Provide the public with a high-quality recreational experience on refuge lands and waters and increase opportunities and access for hunters; • Design a hunting program that is administratively efficient and manageable with existing staffing levels; • Implement a hunt program that is safe for all refuge users; • Provide hunting opportunities for youth and those that need assistance

Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3356 directs the Service to enhance and expand public access to lands and waters on national wildlife refuges for hunting, fishing , and other forms of outdoor recreation. The proposed action will also promote one of the priority public uses of the Refuge System, and will promote stewardship of our natural resources and increase public appreciation and support for the refuge by providing opportunities for visitors to hunt. To address the needs stated above, the purpose of the proposed action will bring the refuge into compliance with management guidance detailed in the orders, policy, and Federal law to “recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general uses of the Refuge System” and “ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses.” 16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)).

Monomoy NWR’s CCP from March 2016 identified the goal to “Provide the public with wildlife-dependent recreational, interpretive, and environmental educational opportunities to enhance awareness and appreciation of refuge resources and to promote stewardship of the wildlife and habitats of Monomoy NWR.” Furthermore, Objective 2.7 of the CCP stated that we would “Officially open up to 40 percent of the refuge within the Declaration of Taking to waterfowl hunting in accordance with Federal law and Massachusetts regulations.”

The presence of mammalian predators (i.e., coyote, red fox, domestic dog, fisher, mink, weasel, striped skunk, river otter, raccoon, opossum, and muskrat) on the islands fluctuates with ease of access to mainland source populations. Access to the island became easier for land-based mammals with the connection to Nauset/South Beach in November 2006, when staff observed a corresponding increase in mammal activity on South Monomoy Island. However, the February 2013 and April 2017 breaks in Nauset/South Beach appear to limit the number of coyotes and

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-3

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

other mammalian predators. As North Monomoy Island continues to expand northward toward Morris Island, it is possible that mammal populations may again increase. The refuge implements several strategies on an annual basis to reduce the number of predators on the refuge. Adding recreational coyote hunting may support these efforts. Lethal management of eastern coyotes is addressed within the “Predator and Competitor Management Plan” of the CCP.

This EA serves as the NEPA document that analyzes the impacts on environmental, cultural, and historical resources of providing hunting opportunities on the refuge.

Alternatives Considered:

Alternative A – Keeping Monomoy NWR closed to hunting (e.g. Current Management Strategies) – [No Action Alternative]:

The No Action Alternative would keep all of Monomoy NWR closed to all forms of hunting. Periodic patrols from Federal and state wildlife officers will be performed to ensure hunting is not taking place on refuge lands or waters, and enforcement of the open waters west of the refuge would increase. Marker buoys delineating the western boundaries of the Declaration of Taking would be installed.

Alternative B –Opening Monomoy NWR for Waterfowl (ducks, geese and coots) and Coyotes – [Proposed Action Alternative]:

The Service has prepared a Hunting Plan, presented in this document as the Proposed Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, the Service proposes to open hunting to 3,080 acres for waterfowl hunting, and 7,250 acres to coyote hunting on Monomoy NWR where these uses are found to be compatible. All Units opened to hunting under this proposed action will follow the Commonwealth of Massachusetts seasons and regulations and subject to additional refuge-specific regulations.

MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING: Waterfowl (duck, goose and coot) hunting in accordance with specific Massachusetts State Regulations is permitted on approximately 3,080 acres of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exists. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. A special use permit and fee will be required for all commercial hunting guides. We allow the use of dogs for retrieving game.

COYOTE HUNTING: Coyote hunting is permitted on approximately 7,250 acres of the refuge as hunting access, habitats, and conditions exists. A special use permit and fee will be required for all commercial hunting guides. Hunters will self-navigate to their location. The refuge will be open for coyote hunting in accordance with specific Massachusetts State regulations and subject to the following refuge-specific conditions: ● Hunting hours on the refuge will be ½ hour before sunrise until sunset. No night hunting will be permitted. This regulation is being imposed due to presence of up to 30,000 seals hauled out both inland and along beaches during winter months. There is a greater risk of hunters inadvertently harassing these marine mammals and even accidentally shooting one with a misplaced shot at a coyote during the night. The

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-4

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

refuge also does not allow overnight camping. Additionally, access to the refuge and anchoring of boats is extremely difficult during daylight. Accessing the refuge at night will make it more dangerous for hunters and emergency responders. ● The refuge coyote hunt season would begin November 1 to protect the numerous field staff and ongoing research and management projects during the busy avian migration season in October. ● No hunting is permitted when seal research teams are operating on the refuge due to safety concerns. Researchers typically access the refuge for up to 12 days between late December and early February. Hunters would therefore be required to contact the refuge manager by phone (508-945-0594) or email ([email protected]) at least 2 days in advance of their proposed hunt date to ensure no researchers are operating on the islands. ● Hunters would be required to report the location(s) and number of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program. ● Use of dogs for coyote hunting will not be permitted.

Refuge-specific hunting permits will not be required to hunt waterfowl or coyote on Monomoy NWR. Although the Service will implement several specific regulations that differ from other parts of the state, they are not substantial enough to warrant implementation of a permit system. There will be no limit to the number of hunters or guides allowed to participate in these hunts as participation is expected to be low.

Commercial hunting guides would be required to obtain a Special Use Permit (SUP) from the Refuge Manager and pay a processing fee. All monies minus administrative costs would be used to enhance the hunting program. As a condition of the SUP, guides would be required to report annually the number of hunters (parties), days hunted and number and species of game taken. Prior to hunting, coyote hunters would be required to inform the refuge manager by phone the days and hours they will be hunting. All coyote hunters would also be required to report the number and location of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program.

The Monomoy Light Keepers House, located on the southeast section of South Monomoy Island (Figure 1.4), is regularly used as housing for refuge staff, volunteers and researchers; therefore, it is considered to be an ‘Occupied Dwelling’ per Massachusetts Hunt Regulations. No hunting will be permitted within 500 feet of this building and associated oil shed. Larger safety zones may be established in the future if the safety of occupants becomes a greater concern.

Hunting is closed from the refuge boundary at the mean low water line to 400 feet inland of where the dune line meets the Atlantic-facing shoreline to protect the large population of seals found throughout these beaches and within the adjacent dune systems.

The hunt program on Monomoy NWR would be in accordance with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts hunting rules and regulations for waterfowl (duck, coot and geese) and coyote (except as noted above), Federal regulations in 50 CFR, and additional refuge-specific regulations. The refuge weighs a number of factors in opening an area to hunting, including safety considerations and limiting conflicts with ongoing research and management efforts.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-5

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

The refuge manager may, upon annual review of the hunting program, modify the program to ensure compatibility. Restrictions may occur if hunting becomes inconsistent with other priority refuge programs, endangers refuge resources or public safety.

Mitigation Measures to Avoid Conflicts: • Current hunting and fishing information will be available at the refuge’s headquarters and posted on the refuge’s website and at on-site kiosks. • Regulations set by the State will be enforced by refuge and State law enforcement officers. • Hunting will take place during daylight hours only • A 500-foot safety zone will be established around the Monomoy Light Keepers house to enhance the safety of refuge staff, researchers or volunteers residing in the dwelling. • All commercial guides will be required to obtain a Special Use Permit and report on the number of hunters, days hunted and game taken on an annual basis • Coyote hunters will be required to contact the refuge manager prior to hunting to ensure safety of hunters, staff and visitors This alternative offers increased opportunities for public hunting and fulfills the Service’s mandate under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. The Service has determined that the hunt plan is compatible with the purposes of the Monomoy NWR and the mission of the Refuge System.

Affected Environment: For a detailed description of the current environmental conditions of Monomoy NWR refer to Chapter 3 of the 2016 CCP at https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Monomoy/what_we_do/finalccp.html

The refuge’s natural terrestrial habitats are dominated by intertidal sandflats, open sand, grass- covered dunes, and salt marsh, interspersed with shrublands representative of coastal ecosystems. The majority (60 percent) of Monomoy’s vegetation cover types are shaped by the dynamic tidal processes and shifting sands associated with barrier beach habitats. The remaining 40 percent is composed of upland shrubland and forest with woody shrubs and small trees.

Monomoy NWR’s beaches and salt marshes provide important spawning and nursery habitat for horseshoe crabs, and the refuge is one of the most important areas for horseshoe crabs in the State (USFWS 2002). The refuge provides habitat for large populations of gray and harbor seals and is the largest gray seal haulout site on the U.S. Atlantic seaboard. The 2015 count, based on aerial photography conducted in May 2011, numbered 19,166 individual gray seals hauled out on the refuge (Josephson, personal communication 2016), a number which has trended upward since that time.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-6

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

About 12 percent of the State’s piping plover population nests on Monomoy NWR and Nauset/South Beach combined. The refuge hosts one of the largest common tern colonies along the Atlantic seaboard in most years since 1999, and the largest laughing gull colony in Massachusetts in most years since 2001. Monomoy NWR also is a reintroduction site for the Federally-threatened northeastern beach tiger beetle and seabeach amaranth plant.

North Monomoy Island North Monomoy Island is an estimated 1.3 miles long and 0.4 miles wide and consists of beach, dunes, intertidal, salt marsh, and (sand and mud) flats. North Monomoy Island provides habitat for spawning horseshoe crabs, nesting habitat for salt marsh sparrows, and nesting and staging areas for shorebirds, terns, and wading birds.

South Monomoy Island and Nauset/South Beach South Monomoy Island is roughly tear-shaped, about 6 miles long and 1.3 miles wide at the southern end and is characterized by sand and mudflats, sandy beaches, extensive dunes, salt marsh, and freshwater ponds and wetlands. Small salt marsh patches occur on the northwest and southwest sides, consisting primarily of salt marsh cordgrass, salt marsh hay, saltgrass, and black grass. The freshwater ponds and marshes, which cover more than 150 acres on South Monomoy Island, host cattail, pond lilies, and common reed (USFWS 1988).

As a result of ongoing, natural coastal beach migration processes typical of this area, adjacent Nauset/South Beach accreted sufficiently to connect to the northeast tip of South Monomoy Island (Figure 1.1) in 2006, creating a land bridge from the island to mainland Cape Cod. Sand is now accreting on the ocean side, widening the seaward side of the 2006 connection, while salt marsh forms on the interior side of the connection.

Minimoy Island Minimoy Island, a small island located west of the northern tip of South Monomoy Island, is also included in this management unit. This eroding island is currently estimated to be 0.25 miles long and 0.36 miles wide, and is also characterized by sandy beaches and dunes, as well as a growing salt marsh on the east side. This management unit provides habitat for thousands of nesting and migrating birds, including shorebirds and terns.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-7

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Table 1. Primary Refuge Habitat Plant Community Descriptions Habitat Type Description

North Atlantic Upper Sparsely vegetative beach environment consisting of occasional Ocean Beach American searocket (Cakile edentula spp.)

Northern Beach Heather Dwarf shrubland with vegetative communities consisting of woolly Dune Shrubland beachheather (Hudsonia tomentosa) and bearberry (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)

Northern Interdunal Dwarf Shrub-dominated community occurring within shallow Cranberry Swale basins or swales. Dominant herbaceous vegetative communities include large cranberry (Vaccinium marocarpon) and Northern bayberry (Morella pensylvanica) (Commonwealth of Massachusetts 2016)

North Atlantic Low Salt Monotypic tall grassland dominated by smooth cordgrass (Spartina Marsh alterniflora) in regularly flooded intertidal zones

Salt Panne and Pools Depressions within salt and brackish marshes in which water pools. These areas often contain herbaceous vegetation such as beaked tasselweed (Ruppia maritima) and sea clubrush (Schoenoplectus maritimus)

Tidal Flat Intertidal sand and mud flats associated with coastal areas where sediment accumulates. (USFWS 1982)

Submerged Aquatic Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) primarily dominated by eel Vegetation grass beds located in shallow marine environments.

Open Water Open water habitats include tidal creeks estuaries, shallow marine and associated transitional habitats influenced by fluctuating water levels. These habitats also provide foraging opportunities for other species including waterfowl, wading birds shorebirds and colonial nesting birds.

Federally Listed Endangered or Threatened Species Three federally listed species are known to breed on Monomoy NWR: piping plover (threatened), roseate tern (endangered), and northeastern beach tiger beetle (threatened). A fourth federally listed species, the red knot (threatened) , uses Monomoy NWR during its long-distance migration, particularly when staging during the fall southbound migration. The federally threatened seabeach amaranth plant was reintroduced to Monomoy in 2017. The following paragraphs describe the presence of these five species on Monomoy NWR.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-8

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Piping Plover Management and protection of piping plovers is one of the priority programs for the refuge. Early documentation of piping plover on the refuge is scattered, but the species was nesting on the refuge prior to listing. Beginning in 1983, piping plovers were counted and monitored annually on the refuge. In February 1988, a master plan (USFWS 1988) was completed for Monomoy NWR, which stipulated that all piping plover nesting sites be closed seasonally to the public. Starting that year, nesting sites were closed to the public from April through August to help protect the birds, their nests, and their habitat, and that effort has continued to the present time. In recent years, the refuge has had a low of four nesting pairs of piping plover in 1993, with recorded numbers greatly expanding after the initiation of the avian diversity program in 1996. While plovers successfully nest on Monomoy NWR, recent numbers (generally, 30 to 45 pairs) are generally lower than the potential capacity estimated for Monomoy NWR.

Roseate Tern Monomoy NWR is an important nesting site for this species. Massachusetts tern populations, including roseate and common terns, were abundant during the mid-19th century, with hundreds of thousands of pairs reportedly nesting on Muskeget Island alone and several smaller colonies located on the mainland of Cape Cod which included colonies in Chatham and Wellfleet (Nisbet 1973). By the late 1800s, due to a combination of shooting and egging for food and bait, and feather collection for the millinery trade, numbers of terns nesting on Cape Cod and the islands had dramatically declined to estimates of between 5 and 10 thousand pairs. The roseate tern was listed as an endangered species because of the significant reduction in nesting sites; 30 major colonies were abandoned or experienced substantial declines between 1920 and 1979. By 1997, Cape Cod, Nantucket, and Martha’s Vineyard had only 20 nesting pairs — considerably low numbers when compared to the 105 pairs in 1999. Due to inconsistent tern surveys and monitoring protocols prior to 1987, it is unclear whether the population is now stable or declining (USFWS 1998a). In 2002, Monomoy NWR, though considered a minor site, was one of only three sites in Massachusetts supporting nesting roseate terns.

Northeastern Beach Tiger Beetle In August of 1990, the Service listed the northeastern beach tiger beetle as threatened. This tiger beetle occurred historically “in great swarms” on beaches along the Atlantic coast from Cape Cod to central New Jersey, and along Chesapeake Bay beaches in Maryland and Virginia. In 1994, only two small populations remained on the Atlantic coast. Currently northeastern beach tiger beetles can be found at two sites north of the Chesapeake Bay in Massachusetts: one on the south shore of Martha’s Vineyard and one on South Monomoy and Nauset/South Beach in Chatham, Massachusetts. The successful establishment of a northeastern beach tiger beetle population requires a long stretch of relatively wide beach with no OSVs and relatively light recreational impacts. It is difficult to find these characteristics along the Massachusetts coast.

Since 2004, tiger beetle larvae have not been transferred to Monomoy NWR due to logistical challenges and habitat loss on the source beach at Martha’s Vineyard. However, annual monitoring confirms successful survival and production of tiger beetles through all stages of life, and gives a firm indication of a new self-sustaining population at Monomoy NWR.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-9

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Red Knot In December 2014, the red knot was designated as threatened (effective January 12, 2015). Southeastern Massachusetts, and Monomoy NWR in particular, are likely to provide one of the most important sites for adult and juvenile red knots during their southward migration (Koch and Paton 2009, Harrington et al. 2010a, Harrington et al. 2010b). Research has shown that this region supports red knots bound for different winter destinations. North American wintering birds exhibit different migration chronology, flight feather molt, and even foraging habits than South American wintering birds (Harrington et al. 2010b). In 2009, refuge staff began partnering with the Conserve Wildlife Foundation of New Jersey and others to cannon-net shorebirds on Monomoy NWR during southward migration.

Seabeach Amaranth Seabeach amaranth was federally listed as a threatened species in 1993. It is native (endemic) to Atlantic Coast beaches and barrier islands and occupies elevations from 8 inches to 5 feet above mean high tide. The habitat of seabeach amaranth is sparsely vegetated with annual herbs and, less commonly, perennial herbs (mostly grasses) and scattered shrubs. Seabeach amaranth is often associated with beaches managed for the protection of beach nesting birds such as the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and least tern (Sterna antillarum). Threats to seabeach amaranth include beach stabilization (particularly the use of beach armoring, such as sea walls and riprap), intensive recreational use, mechanical beach raking, and herbivory by insects.

Because Monomoy NWR provides highly suitable habitat conditions for this species, and is within the northern limits of its historic range, a reintroduction effort was implemented in 2017, when 2,000 seeds were planted along the Atlantic-facing beach front of South Monomoy Island.

State Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Species of Concern Monomoy NWR provides habitat for numerous State-listed species. In particular, the refuge is mapped as Priority and Estimated Habitat (13th edition of the MA Natural Heritage Atlas) for 10 State-listed species. (http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/dfw/natural-heritage/regulatory- review/regulatory-maps-priority-and-estimated-habitats/ (accessed February 2015).

Table 2. State-listed Species for which Monomoy NWR is Designated Priority and Estimated Habitat Species State Status Federal Status Roseate tern Endangered Endangered Common tern Special Concern None Arctic tern Special Concern None Least tern Special Concern None Northern harrier Threatened None Piping plover Threatened Threatened Pied-billed grebe Endangered None

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-10

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Species State Status Federal Status Oysterleaf Endangered None American sea-blite Special Concern None Northeastern beach tiger beetle Endangered Threatened

Environmental Consequences of the Action This section analyzes the environmental consequences of the action on each affected resource, including direct and indirect effects. This EA only includes the written analyses of the environmental consequences on a resource when the impacts on that resource could be more than negligible and therefore considered an “affected resource”. Any resources that will not be more than negligibly impacted by the action have been dismissed from further analyses.

Table 3 provides: • A brief description of the affected resources in the proposed action area; • Impacts of the proposed action and any alternatives on those resources, including direct and indirect effects.

Table 4 provides a brief description of the cumulative impacts of the proposed action and any alternatives.

Impact Types Direct impacts are those which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place. Indirect impacts are those which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Impacts includes ecological (such as the impacts on natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected ecosystems), aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative. Impacts may also include those resulting from actions which may have both beneficial and detrimental impacts, even if on balance the agency believes that the impacts will be beneficial. Beneficial impacts are those resulting from management actions that maintain or enhance the quality and/or quality of identified refuge resources or recreational opportunities. Adverse impacts are those resulting from management actions that degrade the quality and/or quantity of identified refuge resources or recreational opportunities. Duration of Impacts Short-term impacts affect identified refuge resources or recreational opportunities; they occur during implementation of the management action but last no longer. Medium-term impacts affect identified refuge resources or recreational opportunities that occur during implementation of the management action; they are expected to persist for some time into the future though not throughout the life of the action.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-11

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Long-term impacts affect identified refuge resources or recreation opportunities; they occur during implementation of the management action and are expected to persist throughout the life of the Plan and possible longer. Intensity of Impact Negligible impacts result from management actions that cannot be reasonably expected to affect identified refuge resources or recreational opportunities at the identified scale. Minor impacts result from a specified management action that can be reasonably expected to have detectable though limited impact on identified refuge resources or recreation opportunities at the identified scale. Moderate impacts result from a specified management action that can be reasonably expected to have apparent and detectable impacts on identified refuge resources or recreation opportunities at the identified scale. Major impacts result from a specified management action that can be reasonably expected to have readily apparent and substantial impacts on identified refuge resources and recreation opportunities at the identified scale.

TABLE 3. AFFECTED NATURAL RESOURCES AND ANTICIPATED IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ANY ALTERNATIVES ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Waterfowl: Monomoy NWR has among the No Action: No migratory bird highest species richness of breeding waterfowl hunting would be permitted on the throughout the state. Brood surveys conducted refuge; therefore, no direct impacts to sporadically over the years have found the these species through hunting would following waterfowl species breeding on the refuge: occur. mallard, Canada goose, American black duck,

gadwall, green-winged teal, American widgeon, Proposed Action: The Massachusetts northern pintail, northern shoveler, blue-winged migratory bird season is generally teal, and ruddy duck, among others (USFWS open from mid-October through mid- unpublished data). January. Hunting would not have a

significant impact on local, regional, South Monomoy’s freshwater ponds and marshes or Atlantic Flyway waterfowl also provide important migratory stopover and populations because the percentage wintering habitat for waterfowl. Redhead, taken on the refuge, though possibly bufflehead, common goldeneye, hooded merganser, additive to existing hunting take, lesser scaup, greater scaup, ring-necked duck, would measure a small fraction of a canvasback, pied-billed grebe, and American coot percent of the estimated migratory have also been found to use Monomoy’s freshwater game birds populations. In addition ponds and marshes as migratory stopovers (Nikula, to direct mortality, hunting could personal communication 2011).The shellfish-rich result in some short-term waters around the refuge attract thousands of redistribution due to disturbance. migrating and wintering scoter, common eider,

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-12

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS long-tailed duck, and red-breasted merganser. Massachusetts and Atlantic Flyway Extensive eelgrass and sea lettuce beds in the Council have responsibility of nearshore waters of Monomoy NWR provide winter establishing season length and harvest food for wintering and migrating Atlantic brant. limits for all species we propose to open to hunting at Monomoy NWR. They have evaluated population parameters and habitat conditions and determined that populations are at levels acceptable to support a public hunt while maintaining healthy population levels that are commensurate with the carrying capacity of the habitat.

Overall, we anticipate an average of two waterfowl hunters per day. Using the 2018/2019 hunting season as a guide (November 19 to January 26), there were a total of 58 hunting days (as no hunting is allowed in Massachusetts on Sundays, thus all Sundays have been subtracted). Therefore, we estimate approximately 116 hunt visits per year for waterfowl. According to local experts and the professional judgement of refuge staff, this would result in an estimated waterfowl harvest (duck, goose, and coot) of 232 mixed-species harvested per year (2 harvested/visit x 116 visits = 232).

All State and Federal stamps and licenses will be required to hunt on the refuge. The purchase of a duck stamp goes towards purchase of wetland habitat for inclusion in the Refuge System.

Partnerships and assisted hunting opportunities planned by the refuge could assist in increasing hunter numbers in the future.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-13

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Coyote: Evidence of coyote on Monomoy NWR No Action: No recreational coyote was first recorded in 1996 (USFWS 1996b), and hunting would be permitted on the evidence of coyote denning has been observed in refuge; therefore, no impacts to this most years since 1998. Beginning in 1998, lethal species through recreational hunting coyote removal has been conducted to minimize would occur. depredation on nesting birds. Proposed Action: Opening refuge lands to coyote hunting will likely adversely affect this species during the hunting season. However, coyote hunting may benefit other refuge priority species.

We anticipate an average of one hunter per month, and 4 to 5 hunt visits per year for coyote, with a harvest of one coyote per year.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-14

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Other Wildlife and Aquatic Species: No Action: No hunting will be The refuge supports a diversity of wildlife species permitted on the refuge, therefore of coastal Massachusetts including game and there will be no impacts to other nongame species, fish, crustaceans, and wildlife species through hunting. invertebrates, which are important contributors to the overall biodiversity on the refuge. Songbirds, Proposed Action: While resident and raptors, wading birds, shorebirds waterfowl and non-game wildlife in areas newly waterbirds utilize the refuge for breeding, wintering opened to hunters and hunting may be and migratory habitat. negatively impacted by disturbance, that impact is expected to be negligible. The degree of the impact by the Proposed Action is not expected to be much different than what may already occur (including temporary displacement of songbirds, raptors, and resident wildlife from foot traffic moving through the area). Certain species such as nesting shorebirds could benefit from reduced predator populations.

Non-toxic shot is required for all migratory bird hunting, which reduces negative impacts to wildlife using waterways and marshes. The refuge is not requiring the use of non-toxic shot for coyote but encourages hunters to utilize it to reduce unintended negative impacts to wildlife. Some scavenging of game shot on the ground or in carcasses left by hunters could occur, but the likelihood of poisoning of wildlife is low.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-15

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Threatened and Endangered Species and Other No Action: No hunting will be Special Status Species: permitted on the refuge, therefore Three federally listed species are known to breed on there will be no impacts to other Monomoy NWR: piping plover (Charadrius wildlife species through hunting. melodus, threatened), roseate tern (Sterna dougallii, endangered), and northeastern beach tiger beetle Proposed Action: This alternative (Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis, threatened). The red will result in some short-term, but knot (Calidris canutus rufa, threatened) uses negligible, negative impacts to Monomoy NWR during its long-distance migration, threatened and endangered species particularly when staging during the fall southbound and other species status due to migration. The seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus disturbance in areas where human pumilus, threatened) was re-introduced to South access for hunting activities occur, Monomoy Island in 2017 and annual monitoring however access is limited in areas continues. The following paragraphs describe the where protected nesting birds are presence of these five species on Monomoy NWR. known to exist. One of the refuge’s A Section 7 Endangered Species Act review was objectives is to maximize production conducted in coordination with the Service’s New of these nesting bird species such as England Field Office for these five federally listed the piping plover and terns through species. the reduction of predation and human disturbance. Several measures are in In addition to the species listed above, Monomoy place to protect these birds through NWR has also been designated as Priority Habitat educating the public and through for several species by MA Natural Heritage and seasonal closures. Endangered Species Program (http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/dfw/natural- In addition, the refuge will continue heritage/regulatory-review/regulatory-maps- to work with the state and local towns priority-and-estimated-habitats/ (accessed February to protect these species through 2015). These species include: Common tern, Arctic seasonal closures and predator tern, Least tern, Northern harrier, Pied-billed grebe, management. Recreational coyote Oysterleaf, and American sea-blite. hunting, when performed in concert with other predator management efforts, may directly benefit species that are prone to nest predation.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-16

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Marine Mammals: Gray seal, a Massachusetts No Action: No hunting will be species of special concern, harbor seal and harp seal permitted on the refuge, therefore are found on the refuge and in the surrounding there will be no impacts to other waters. Gray seals use the refuge for hauling out and wildlife species through hunting. pupping. Monomoy NWR is the largest haulout site for gray seals on the U.S. Atlantic seaboard, and one Proposed Action: This alternative of only two consistent sites in Massachusetts where may result in some short-term gray seals pup. Gray seals use the refuge lands and negative impacts to marine mammals waters all year. While Monomoy has never be a due to disturbance in areas where substantial pupping site since the Refuge was human access for hunting activities established, gray seal pupping on South Monomoy occurs. Disturbance, harassment of, island has been increasing steadily over the last marine mammals is prohibited under decade. the Marine Mammal Protection Act. One of the refuge’s objectives is to protect these species. Several measures are in place to protect marine mammals through educating the public, supporting research, adhering to recommended buffer distances, and enforcing ‘no hunt’ zones throughout seal haulout and pupping areas.

The refuge is also not permitting night hunting for the primary purpose of reducing the risk of unintentional disturbance to marine mammals that are hauled out on the refuge.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-17

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Vegetation (including vegetation of special No Action: No impacts to this management concern): resource will occur under this The refuge’s natural terrestrial habitats are alternative. dominated by intertidal sandflats, open sand, grass- covered dunes, and salt marsh, interspersed with Proposed Action: Opening the shrublands representative of coastal ecosystems. refuge to hunting is not expected to The majority (60 percent) of Monomoy’s vegetation adversely affect vegetation. While cover types are shaped by the dynamic tidal some vegetation could be trampled, processes and shifting sands associated with barrier this is expected to be minor as most beach habitats. Vegetation varies throughout the hunting would occur when plants are refuge, but hunt areas are generally either forested dormant and the number of hunters is wetlands and uplands or tidal saltmarsh. anticipated to be low. Additionally, hunter use during all seasons will be North Monomoy Island dispersed, minimizing the impact to North Monomoy Island is an estimated 1.3 miles any one area. long and 0.4 miles wide and consists of beach, dunes, intertidal salt marsh, and (sand and mud) flats. North Monomoy Island provides habitat for spawning horseshoe crabs, nesting habitat for salt marsh sparrows, and nesting and staging areas for shorebirds, terns, and wading birds.

South Monomoy Island South Monomoy Island is about 6 miles long and 1.3 miles wide at the southern end and is characterized by sand and mudflats, sandy beaches, extensive dunes, salt marsh, and freshwater ponds and wetlands. Small salt marsh patches occur on the northwest and southwest sides, consisting primarily of salt marsh cordgrass, salt marsh hay, saltgrass, and black grass. The freshwater ponds and marshes, which cover more than 150 acres on South Monomoy Island, host cattail, pond lilies, and common reed (USFWS 1988).

Air Quality: No Action: No impacts to this The Commonwealth of Massachusetts measures resource will occur under this outdoor air quality for more than 20 monitoring alternative. stations across the state, with 15 continuous ozone monitoring stations. Based on information collected Proposed Action: A negligible, from these sites, there were 14 days when the 8- short-term adverse impact could be hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm was exceeded by associated with increased emissions at least one monitoring station in 2010. There were from vehicles and boats; however, it

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-18

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS 36 exceedances during those 14 days (i.e., multiple is anticipated that if those new monitors exceeded the standard on the same day, hunters were not traveling to the MA DEP 2011). The closest two monitoring refuge, they would likely be traveling stations to the refuge are included in those that to other hunt locations or engaging in registered exceedances: Fairhaven (5 days) and other activities that would have Truro (4 days). Exceedances at a station averaged comparable emission releases. over 3 years can lead to a violation of NAAQS. Based on data from 2008 to 2010, both of these stations indicated violation of the 8-hour ozone standard (MA DEP 2011).

Water Resources: No Action: No additional impacts to Monomoy NWR contains freshwater and saltwater this resource would occur under this wetland habitats including salt marsh, intertidal alternative. flats, and ponds. The only source of fresh water is from precipitation. The waters of Monomoy NWR, Proposed Action: Impacts to water including waters in and adjacent (i.e., within 1,000 resources could occur by motorized feet seaward of MLW) to the Cape Cod National boats used by hunters (i.e., Seashore, are classified as marine waters Class SA inadvertently leaking of polluting or freshwaters Class B (MA DEP 2002). Big and substances), as it is the only means of Little Station Ponds are 32-acre and 11-acre accessing the hunt areas. These freshwater ponds, respectively, on South Monomoy impacts would be considered minor Island, originally formed when a bay was closed off and short-term due to low anticipated by the growth of a re-curved spit. Other small numbers of hunters. freshwater ponds and wetlands are present on South Monomoy Island. Most are natural, but a few lie in depressions excavated by the Service in the 1950s in effort to increase waterfowl habitat. Almost 25 acres of salt marsh surround the 5-acre estuarine Hospital Pond at the northern end of South Monomoy Island. Powder Hole, which in the mid-1800s was a deep and extensive harbor, is now a shallow estuarine water body on the southwest end of the refuge.

Wetlands: Monomoy NWR consists of diverse No Action: No additional impacts to wetland habitats including salt marsh and associated this resource would occur under this tidal creek, ponds, and mud flat. These habitats are alternative. located throughout the hunt area. Proposed Action: As most hunting occurs during fall and winter and anticipated hunter numbers are low, impacts to wetland vegetation are negligible and short-term. No impacts

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-19

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS to any wetlands habitats have been observed by refuge staff from other priority public uses.

Wilderness: In 1970, Congress designated No Action: No additional impacts to approximately 2,600 acres of land as wilderness to this resource would occur under this become part of the National Wilderness alternative. Preservation System, thereby preserving the wilderness character of the Monomoy Islands. Proposed Action: Due to the anticipated low number of new “In accordance with … the Wilderness Act…certain hunters, impacts are expected to be lands in the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, negligible. Some vegetation Massachusetts, which comprise about two thousand throughout the refuge may be six hundred acres but excepting and excluding trampled, but there are generally no therefrom two tracts of land containing long-term expected impacts. approximately ninety and one hundred and seventy Additionally, hunter use will be acres, respectively and which are depicted on a map dispersed throughout the refuge, entitled “Monomoy Wilderness—Proposed” and minimizing the impact to any one dated August 1970, which shall be known as the area. Cutting vegetation is prohibited Monomoy Wilderness”—an Act to Designate on the refuge. Certain Lands as Wilderness (Public Law 91-504, 16 U.S.C. § 1132(c)).

The Monomoy wilderness extends to the mean low water mark, as evidenced in records from the Service’s first wilderness proposal and public hearing through to the officially certified description of the wilderness area. The size of the wilderness area has changed over time as the Monomoy landform and surrounding intertidal lands have changed.

Motor boats are allowed in the Monomoy wilderness area because the Wilderness Act allows the use of motor boats to continue where these uses have already been established and deemed desirable by the Secretary of the Interior (16 U.S.C. § 1133(d)(1)).

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-20

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Visitor Use and Experience: The refuge is No Action: No additional impacts to currently open to five of the six priority public uses this resource would occur under this (fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, alternative. environmental education and environmental interpretation). Although sea duck hunting occurs in Proposed Action: All hunting will refuge-owned waters, it has never been officially take place in designated hunting areas opened. About 46,156 visitors access the refuge that are open to all other public uses. each year, including 13,109 to the Visitor Center; However, hunting will be taking place 42,960 for wildlife observation; and 8,601 for at times of the year when other uses fishing, among other users. are occurring at much lower levels. Therefore, impacts to other visitor uses and experiences are anticipated to be minimal.

Refuge Management and Operations: The No Action: No adverse impacts infrastructure in hunt areas associated with refuge would occur under this alternative. management includes several unmaintained trails and the Monomoy Point Light House and keeper’s Proposed Action: While areas of the house. A 500-foot buffer will be established around refuge would be open to hunting, use this structure. of existing infrastructure would be limited. While there may be increased hunters throughout the refuge, impacts to trails are expected to be negligible.

Administration: The staff requirement for offering No Action: No additional impacts to this wildlife-dependent, priority public use is this resource would occur under this minimal. Staff is needed for administrative duties, alternative. such as communicating with the public about the hunt, printing and processing materials, collecting Proposed Action: Estimated costs to applications, coordinating with coyote hunters, and implement this alternative are issuing permits. Refuge law enforcement is needed $22,500 in year 1, and $5,150 to ensure compliance with state and refuge annually. This could slightly affect regulations. The refuge will request the assistance, administration of the refuge. We as needed, of Service or other authorized law would still implement priority actions enforcement personnel from Federal, State, county and obligations in meeting the refuge or local agencies during the hunt. This activity is purpose and mission of the Refuge within the staffing capabilities of the refuge to System, such as habitat restoration manage. and management, environmental education programs, etc.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-21

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ANTICIPATED DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS Socioeconomics: The Town of Chatham has a long No Action: The economic benefit to fishing history, and maintaining a vibrant fishing the local community is not anticipated industry is very important to the Town. The visitor to change under the No Action contact station on Morris Island is accessible by car. Alternative. North Monomoy Island and South Monomoy Island, the majority of which is designated as Proposed Action: While hunting wilderness, are accessible primarily by ferry or visitation will increase, hunting only private boat. The refuge is open year-round, with accounts for 1 percent of expenditures most visitation occurring during the summer tourist related to the refuge. Therefore, only season from late spring to early fall. The refuge a minor beneficial economic impact is offers wildlife viewing sites, hiking trails, and expected to result from the Proposed extensive fishing opportunities. Action; however, it is anticipated to increase in comparison to the No Most refuge visits, especially those to the Monomoy Action Alternative. Islands, occur between May and October, peaking in June, July, and August. The operation of the Refuge System not only provides wildlife with habitat but also provides visitors with opportunities to enjoy a variety of wildlife-dependent recreational and educational activities. The operation of an individual refuge is much like that of any small business. Refuge budgets are spent on salaries, expenses, and payments, much of which are spent within the local community.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE The Service has not identified any Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address potential high and adverse Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and environmental or human health Low-Income Populations, requires all Federal impacts from this proposed action or agencies to incorporate environmental justice into any of the alternatives. The Service their missions by identifying and addressing has identified no minority or low disproportionately high or adverse human health or income communities within the environmental impacts of their programs and impact area. Minority or low income policies on minorities and low- income populations communities will not be and communities. disproportionately affected by any impacts from this proposed action or any of the alternatives.

INDIAN TRUST RESOURCES There are no known Indian Trust Some refuge lands were formerly occupied by Resources on the refuge and this Massachusetts Native Americans. action will not affect any Indian Trust Resources.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-22

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Impact Analysis: Cumulative impacts are defined as “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions” (40 CFR 1508.7).

For more information on the national cumulative impacts of the Service’s hunting and fishing program on the National Wildlife Refuge System, see “U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cumulative Impacts Report 2019-2020 National Wildlife Refuge and National Fish Hatchery Proposed Hunting and Sport Fishing Openings (2019)”.

Table 4. Cumulative Impacts Table Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activity in Area of Descriptions of Anticipated Cumulative Impacts Analysis Hunting Resident Wildlife: The refuge hunt program will be Hunting occurs on public lands and conducted within the framework of State and Federal waters that are found adjacent to or regulations. Population estimates of hunted species not far from the refuge. These areas are developed at a regional and state scale. Hunting include Nantucket Sound and a frameworks and take limits are set based upon these variety of town and state-owned estimates. The proposed hunting program rules will conservation lands throughout Cape be the same as, or more restrictive than, hunting Cod. regulations throughout the State of Massachusetts. By maintaining hunting regulations that are the same as or more restrictive than the State, we can ensure that we are maintaining seasons that are supportive of management on a more regional basis. Such an approach provides consistency with large-scale population status and objectives. The refuge regularly coordinates with the State about the hunting program.

Under the proposed action alternative, the refuge would allow the harvest of coyotes. Nearby public properties in the local area offer similar hunting opportunities. We anticipate a harvest of one coyote per year. Even at the local level, the refuge would add a negligible amount to regional and statewide populations. Wildlife management of populations is important to ensure the health of the ecosystem, and the refuge’s hunt program provides minor, additional beneficial impacts to the cumulative impacts of wildlife management in the state.

Migratory Birds: Migratory bird populations throughout the United States are managed through

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-23

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activity in Area of Descriptions of Anticipated Cumulative Impacts Analysis an administrative process known as flyways. The refuge is located in the Atlantic Flyway. In North America, the process for establishing hunting regulations is conducted annually. In the United States, the process involves a number of scheduled meetings (Flyway Study Committees, Flyway Councils, Service Regulations Committee, etc.) in which information regarding the status of migratory bird populations and their habitats is presented to individuals within the agencies responsible for setting hunting regulations. In addition, public hearings are held and the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register to allow public comment.

Annual waterfowl assessments are based upon the distribution, abundance, and flight corridors of migratory birds. An Annual Waterfowl Population Status Report is produced each year and includes the most current breeding population and production information available for waterfowl in North America (USFWS 2017). The Report is a cooperative effort by the Service, the Canadian Wildlife Service, various state and provincial conservation agencies, and private conservation organizations. An Annual Adaptive Harvest Management Report (AHM) provides the most current data, analyses, and decision making protocols (USFWS 2017). These reports are intended to aid the development of waterfowl harvest regulations in the United States for each hunting season.

The Service believes that hunting on the refuge will not add significantly to the cumulative impacts of migratory bird management on local, regional, or Atlantic Flyway populations because the percentage likely taken on the refuge, though possibly additive to existing hunting takes, would be a tiny fraction of the estimated populations. Overall populations will continue to be monitored and future harvests will be adjusted as needed under the existing flyway and State regulatory processes. Several points support

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-24

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activity in Area of Descriptions of Anticipated Cumulative Impacts Analysis this conclusion: (1) the proportion of the national waterfowl harvest that occurs on national wildlife refuges is only 6 percent (Service 2013c); (2) there are no populations that exist wholly and exclusively on national wildlife refuges; (3) annual hunting regulations within the United States are established at levels consistent with the current population status; (4) refuges cannot permit more liberal seasons than provided for in Federal frameworks; and (5) refuges purchased with funds derived from the Federal Duck Stamp must limit hunting to 40 percent of the available area.

Although the Proposed Action Alternative will increase hunting opportunities compared to the No Action Alternative, the slight increase in hunter activity (i.e., an estimated harvest of 232 waterfowl per year) will not rise to a significant cumulative impact locally, regionally, or nationally.

Development and Population Because the refuge uses an adaptive management Increase approach for its hunt program, reviewing the hunt Today, although Massachusetts is the program annually and revising annually (if seventh smallest state in the U.S., it is necessary), the Service’s hunt program can be the third most densely populated state adjusted to ensure that it does not contribute further in the country (Massachusetts to the cumulative impacts of population growth and Population 2018-11-30). development on resident wildlife and migratory birds. In 2010, Chatham had a local year- round population of around 1,400. The largest employers in the area, in terms of employment, were: (1) the arts, entertainment, recreation, and accommodation and food services; (2) finance/insurance, real estate and rental/leasing; and (3) health care and social assistance (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Together, these three industries employed about 43 percent of the total workforce. Construction and retail trade also employed about 20 percent of total employment.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-25

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activity in Area of Descriptions of Anticipated Cumulative Impacts Analysis Developmental pressure, in Chatham appears to be stable due to the lack of available land suitable for building; however, development throughout much of Cape Cod continues to increase.

Use of lead ammunition The number of participants in coyote hunting is Lead ammunition is permitted in expected to be low and the number of actual shots Massachusetts and on the refuge for fired will be even lower; therefore, the amount of all hunts, except migratory birds. additional lead to the landscape will be negligible. However, it is possible that any accumulation of lead could incur negative impacts if it is consumed by wildlife, but the likelihood of that resulting in poisoning is low.

Climate Change Under the Proposed Action, the refuge would use an Ecological stressors are expected to adaptive management approach for its hunt program, affect a variety of natural processes reviewing the hunt program annually and revising and associated resources into the annually (if necessary), the Service’s hunt program future. The most substantial concern can be adjusted to ensure that it does not contribute at the refuge is sea level rise and the further to the cumulative impacts of climate change impact on marsh elevation. This is on resident wildlife and migratory birds. already causing marsh migration, marsh inundation, and increased mortality in forests adjacent to saltmarshes. These habitat changes may dramatically reduce the amount and quality of both forest for resident wildlife and saltmarsh for migratory birds that are hunted. As a result, wildlife would be forced into reduced amounts of available habitat.

Concentrating birds into smaller areas has potential to more readily allow disease to spread within overwintering waterfowl populations, resulting in increased bird mortality.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-26

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Monitoring The Refuge will be adaptive in the harvest management under the hunt program. Refuge-specific hunting regulations may be altered to achieve species-specific harvest objectives in the future. Many game species populations are monitored by MassWildlife through field surveys and game harvest reports, which will provide an additional means for monitoring populations. Refuge staff will also use formal and anecdotal information to help monitor population on refuge lands. The State has determined that populations of game species are at levels acceptable to support hunting and these assessments are reviewed and adjusted periodically.

Summary of Analysis This EA briefly provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The term “significantly” as used in NEPA requires consideration of both the context of the action and the intensity of impacts. This section summarizes the findings and conclusions of the analyses above so that we may determine the significance of the impacts.

Table 5. Summary of Findings Table Resource No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative

Hunted Species No impact Negligible, short-term adverse impacts (waterfowl and coyote) minor, long-term beneficial impacts (population control for hunted species which decreases potential for disease and/or famine) Other Wildlife and No impact Minor, short-term adverse impacts Aquatic Species (disturbance). Minor, long-term positive impact potential (coyote)– reduced predation of birds and their eggs Threatened and No impact Minor, long-term positive impact (coyote) – Endangered Species reduced predation of birds and their eggs Vegetation No impact Negligible, short-term impacts (trampling) and soil erosion (boats, wakes, boat landing sites)

Air Quality No impact Negligible, short-term adverse impacts (emissions) Water Resources No impact Minor, short-term adverse impacts (boat emissions) Wetlands No impact Negligible, short-term adverse impacts (trampling) Cultural Resources No impact No adverse impacts Visitor Use and No impact Negligible, short-term impacts Experience (temporary inconvenience)

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-27

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Resource No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative

Socioeconomics No impact Minor, long-term positive impacts (economic growth) Refuge Management and No impact Minor, long-term positive Operations (providing opportunities) and negative (funding) impacts Environmental Justice No impact No impact

Indian Trust Resources No impact No impact

No Action: There would be no additional costs to the refuge under this alternative. There would be no change to the current public use and wildlife management programs on the refuge. There would not be an increase in economic impacts to local economies. New hunting opportunities would not be created under this alternative, including new access sites to refuge lands for other users. This alternative has the least short-term impacts to physical and biological resources; however, long-term impacts on habitat quality could be adverse. In addition, this would reduce our actions mandated under the Refuge System Administration Act and Secretarial Order 3356.

Proposed Action: This alternative is the Service’s proposed action because it offers the best opportunity for public hunting that would result in a minimal impact on physical and biological resources, while meeting the Service’s mandates under the Refuge System Administration Act and Secretarial Order 3356. The Service believes that hunting on the refuge will not have a significant impact on local or regional wildlife populations because the percentage likely to be harvested on the refuge, though possibly additive to existing hunting takes, would be a tiny fraction of the estimated populations. In addition, overall populations will continue to be monitored in collaboration with MassWildlife and future harvests will be adjusted as needed. Refuge hunting would not measurably add to the cumulative impacts to wildlife from hunting at the local or regional levels, and would only result in minor impacts to wildlife populations.

Conclusion The Service proposes to open hunting opportunities on Monomoy NWR as analyzed above under the Proposed Action Alternative, which is not anticipated to have any significant impacts on the human environment.

List of Sources, Agencies and Persons Consulted: Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife - Jason Zimmer Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – Kimberly Murray, Elizabeth Josephson Tufts University – Dr. Wendy Puryear

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-28

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

List of Preparers: Linh Phu - Project Leader Tom Eagle - Deputy Project Leader Matthew Hillman – Refuge Manager

State Coordination: National wildlife refuges, including Monomoy NWR, conduct hunting programs within the framework of State and Federal regulations. All authorized hunts are at least as restrictive as the State of Massachusetts. By maintaining hunting regulations that are as, or more, restrictive than the State, individual refuges ensure that they are maintaining seasons which are supportive of management on a local and regional basis. This EA associated with the Hunting Plan will be shared with the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MassWildlife) for their review. The refuge has moved forward with developing this Hunting Plan and EA based upon earlier formal coordination with MassWildlife as well as the intervening informal discussions.

Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex (Monomoy NWR) will continue to consult and coordinate with MassWildlife annually to maintain regulations and programs that are consistent with the State; as well as to monitor populations of proposed hunt species and to set harvest goals. Refuge staff met with MassWildlife representatives to discuss the current hunting program and to discuss recommendations for the future.

Tribal Consultation: Email notification regarding the opening of Monomoy NWR to hunting was sent to Cedric Cromwell, Chairman of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribal Council on January 16, 2019. A follow up phone call was made on January 23, 2019 to Chuckie Green, Director of Natural Resources for the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, requesting a letter of support by February 15, 2019. Director Green said he would draft a letter of support and do his best to get a signature from the Tribal Chairman.

Public Outreach: A public meeting will be held during the 30-day public review period in the town of Chatham.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-29

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Determination: This section will be filled out upon completion of any public comment period and at the time of finalization of the Environmental Assessment.

☐ The Service’s action will not result in a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. See the attached “Finding of No Significant Impact”.

☐ The Service’s action may significantly affect the quality of the human environment and the Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

Preparer Signature: ______Date:______

Name/Title/Organization: ______

______

Reviewer Signature: ______Date:______

Name/Title: ______

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-30

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

References: Giese, G.S. 1978. The Barrier Beaches of Chatham, Massachusetts. Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies Report. April 1978. 38 pp. Also, in Cape Cod Chronicle, June 1, 1978, Special Supplement, 7 pp.

Harrington, B.A., S. Koch, L.K. Niles, and K. Kalasz. 2010b. Red knots with different winter destinations: differential use of an autumn stopover area. Waterbirds 33(3): 357-363.

Koch, S.L. and P.W.C. Paton. 2009. Shorebird migration chronology at a stopover site in Massachusetts. Wader Study Group Bulletin 116: 167-174.

Leavitt, D.F. and K. Peters. 2005. Soft Shell Clams, Migratory Shorebirds and the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished Report Prepared for theTown of Chatham, Massachusetts. 100 pp.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP). 2002. Cape Cod Watershed, Water Quality Assessment Report, September 2002.

_____2011. Commonwealth of Massachusetts 2010 Air Quality Report. 43 pp. http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/air/priorities/10aqrpt.pdf; accessed April 2013.

Nisbet, I.C.T. 1973. Terns in Massachusetts: Present Numbers and Historical Changes. Bird- Banding 44(1): 27-55.

Oldale, R.N. 1992. Cape Cod and the Islands: the Geologic Story. Parnassus Imprints, East Orleans, Massachusetts, 208 pp.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1993. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Barnstable County, Massachusetts. 225 pp. http://soildatamart.nrcs. usda.gov/Manuscripts/MA001/0/barnstable.pdf; accessed April 2013.

US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 1988. Environmental Assessment—Master Plan: Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge. Chatham, Massachusetts. 186 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, Massachusetts. [AR, lC, 307-490] U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5, Newton Corner, Massachusetts.

_____1996b. Environmental assessment: Restoration of avian diversity on Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge. Chatham, Massachusetts. 40 pp.

_____1998a. Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii) Recovery Plan - Northeastern Population, First Update. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, Massachusetts. 75 pp.

_____2002. Compatibility Determination for Horseshoe Crab Harvesting at Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge. Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge.

_____ 2016. Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. March.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-31

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

_____ 2017. Waterfowl Population Status, 2017. August.

Wentworth, C.K. 1922. A Scale of Grade and Class Terms for Clastic Sediments. The Journal of Geology 30: 377-392.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-32

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT - DRAFT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HUNTING PLAN MONOMOY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Barnstable County, Massachusetts

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) proposes to open Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) to hunting. An Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to provide decision-making framework that: 1) explores a reasonable range of alternatives to meet project objectives; 2) evaluate potential issues and impacts to the refuge, resources and values; and 3) identifies mitigation measures to lessen the degree or extent of these impacts. The EA evaluated the effects associated with No Action and Proposed Action alternatives.

Selected Action

Proposed Action Alternative The Service proposes to allow public hunting opportunities for waterfowl and coyote on Monomoy NWR in accordance with the refuge’s Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) (Service 2016). Monomoy NWR stretches for 8 miles off the elbow of Cape Cod in the Town of Chatham, Barnstable County, Massachusetts. This 7,898-acre refuge includes South Monomoy Island, North Monomoy Island, Minimoy Island, and 40 acres on Morris Island where the headquarters and visitor contact station are located. We propose to open 3,080 acres of the refuge to waterfowl (i.e., ducks, geese, and coots) hunting, and open approximately 7,250 acres of lands above mean low water (MLW) on North and South Monomoy Islands to coyote hunting.

All units opened to hunting under this proposed action will follow the Commonwealth of Massachusetts seasons and regulations and subject to additional refuge-specific regulations. Monomoy NWR is one of eight refuges that make up the Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex (Refuge Complex), which is headquartered in Sudbury, Massachusetts. The barrier islands are part of a dynamic coastal zone, characterized by an ever-changing landscape. Salt and freshwater marshes, dunes, and ponds provide nesting, resting, and feeding habitat for migratory birds

The preferred alternative was selected over the other alternatives because:

The hunting program, along with all other management programs, relates directly to the overall mission of the Service. Additionally, the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 identifies six priority public uses that are appropriate on national wildlife refuges, including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental interpretation and education. Development and enhancement of a quality and biologically sound hunting program will provide the public with a high-quality recreational experience on refuge lands and increase opportunities and access for hunters, and better align with refuge habitat management objectives. The action also complies with direction set forth in the 2016 CCP.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-33

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Other Alternatives Considered and Analyzed

No Action Alternative Under this alternative, refuge lands would continue to be closed to all forms of hunting. Disadvantages of the no action alternative include not being able to promote a priority public use of the Refuge System. There would be no additional costs to the refuge under this alternative. There would be no change to the current public use and wildlife management programs on the refuge. The refuge would not increase its impact on the economy and would not provide new hunting and access opportunities. This alternative has the least direct impacts of physical and biological resources. In addition, this alternative would not meet mandates under the Refuge System Administration Act and Secretarial Order 3356.

Summary of Effects of Selected Action Implementation of the agency’s decision would be expected to result in the following environmental, social, and economic effects:

Resource No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative

Socioeconomics No impact Minor, long-term positive impacts (economic growth)

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-34

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

Resource No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative

Refuge Management No impact Minor, long-term positive and Operations (providing opportunities) and negative (funding) impacts Environmental Justice No impact No impact

Indian Trust Resources No impact No impact

Measures to mitigate and/or minimize adverse effects have been incorporated into the proposal. These measures include:

• Refuge and State law enforcement officers enforce hunting regulations. Providing hunting information through various forums will ensure the public is aware of applicable laws and policies. • To minimize conflict, refuge specific hunt regulations and hunt unit maps (brochures) will be made available to hunters at kiosks, the refuge website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/monomoy) and at the Refuge Headquarters at 30 Wikis Way on Morris Island, Chatham, Massachusetts. • To help reduce interaction between hunters on the refuge and other user groups off the refuge, refuge boundaries and hunt area boundaries will be clearly posted. • The refuge will be adaptive with harvest management under the hunt program. Refuge- specific hunting regulations may be altered to achieve species-specific harvest objectives in the future. Many game species populations are monitored by MassWildlife through field surveys and game harvest reports, which will provide an additional means for monitoring populations. The State has determined that populations of game species are at levels acceptable to support hunting and these assessments are reviewed and adjusted periodically. • A 500-foot safety zone will be established around the Monomoy Light Keepers house to enhance the safety of refuge staff, researchers or volunteers residing in the dwelling. • All commercial guides will be required to obtain a Special Use Permit and report on the number of hunters, days hunted and game taken on an annual basis. • Coyote hunters will be required to contact the refuge manager prior to hunting to ensure safety of hunters, staff and visitors. • Hunting hours on the refuge will be ½ hour before sunrise until sunset. No night hunting will be permitted. This regulation is being imposed due to presence of up to 30,000 seals hauled out both inland and along beaches during winter months. There is a greater risk of hunters inadvertently harassing these marine mammals and even accidentally shooting one with a misplaced shot at a coyote during the night. The refuge also does not allow overnight camping. Additionally, access to the refuge and anchoring of boats is extremely difficult during daylight. Accessing the refuge at night will make it more dangerous for hunters and emergency responders. • The refuge coyote hunt season would begin November 1 to protect the numerous field staff and ongoing research and management projects during the busy avian migration season in October.

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-35

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

• No hunting is permitted when seal research teams are operating on the refuge due to safety concerns. Researchers typically access the refuge for up to 12 days between late December and early February. Hunters would therefore be required to contact the refuge manager by phone (508-945-0594) or email ([email protected]) at least 2 days in advance of their proposed hunt date to ensure no researchers are operating on the islands. • Hunters would be required to report the location(s) and number of coyotes taken, as these data are critical to enhance the refuge’s ongoing predator control program. • Use of dogs for coyote hunting will not be permitted.

While refuges, by their nature, are unique areas protected for conservation of fish, wildlife and habitat, the proposed action will not have a significant impact on refuge resources and uses for several reasons:

• The Service works closely with the Commonweath to ensure healthy populations of the species for present and future generations of Americans; • The action will result in beneficial impacts to the human environment, including the biodiversity and ecological integrity of the refuge, as well as the wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities and socioeconomics of the local economy, with only negligible adverse impacts to the human environment as discussed above; • The adverse direct and indirect effects of the proposed action on air, water, soil, habitat, wildlife, aesthetic/visual resources, and wilderness values are expected to be minor and short-term. The benefits to long-term ecosystem health that these efforts will accomplish far outweigh any of the short-term adverse impacts discussed in this document; • Refuge staff will monitor for impacts related to hunting; • The action, along with proposed mitigation measures, will ensure that there is low danger to the health and safety of refuge staff, visitors, and the hunters themselves; • The action is not in an ecologically sensitive area; • The action will not impact any threatened or endangered species; or any Federally- designated critical habitat; • The action will not impact any cultural or historical resources; • The action will not impact any wilderness areas; • There is no scientific controversy over the impacts of this action and the impacts of the proposed action are relatively certain; • The proposal is not expected to have any significant adverse effects on wetlands and floodplains, pursuant to Executive Orders 11990 and 11988 because hunters must use established access points that will not be located near sensitive habitats.

The proposal is compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the Refuge System, and consistent with applicable laws and policies regarding the establishment of hunting on national wildlife refuges (see the Compatibility Determination (CD) (Appendix A of the Hunting Plan). Refuge-specific regulations promulgated in conjunction with this action will be finalized through the standard of the Federal Register, and published in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR §32.40).

Public Review The proposal has been thoroughly coordinated with all interested and/or affected parties. Parties

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-36

Appendix B. Environmental Assessment

contacted include: • Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife • Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Kimberly Murray, Elizabeth Josephson) • Tufts University (Dr. Wendy Puryear)

The public will be notified of the availability of the Monomoy NWR Hunting Plan, EA, and CD for review and will include a 30-day comment period. We will inform the public through local venues, the refuge website, and social media. Comments received from the public will be considered, and modifications may be incorporated into the final plan and decision documents. Additionally, public meetings will be held during the public review period in the Town of Chatham.

Summarize the comments received and issues identified

Determination Based upon a review and evaluation of the information contained in the EA as well as other documents and actions of record affiliated with this proposal, the Service has determined that the proposal to implement hunting on Monomoy NWR does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment under the meaning of section 102 (2)(c) of the NEPA of 1969 (as amended). As such, an environmental impact statement is not required. An EA has been prepared in support of this finding and is available upon request to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Monomoy NWR.

______Title Date

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge B-37

INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FORM

Originating Person: Matt Hillman, Refuge Manager Contact Info: [email protected], 774-840-4001 Date: 2/28/2019

I. Region: 5

II. Service Activity (Program): NWRS, hunt plan opening package

III. Pertinent Species and Habitat: a. Listed species and/or their critical habitat within the action area: Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii) Northeastern beach tiger beetle (Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis) Seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus)

b. Proposed species and/or proposed critical habitat within the action area: None

c. Candidate species within the action area: None

IV. Geographic area or station name: Monomoy NWR, Chatham, Barnstable County, MA

V. Location: Proposed waterfowl (duck, goose, and coot) hunting areas include approximately 3,080 acres of offshore waters south of Minimoy Island and west of South Monomoy Island up to the Declaration of Taking boundary line (Figure 1).

Proposed coyote hunting areas include approximately 7,250 acres. Coyote hunting would be closed in the following areas: (1) the Morris Island (‘Headquarters’) unit, (2) a 500-ft buffer around the Monomoy Point Lighthouse, and (3) the Atlantic-facing shoreline from the eastern refuge boundary of South Monomoy Island to a buffer line located 400 ft interior of where the beach meets the dune (Figure 2). The latter closed area is to protect a large population of hauled-out and pupping seals occurring within these areas during the coyote hunt season.

VI. Species/habitat occurrence: • Piping plovers breed on South Monomoy Island from late March to August, and breeding and/or migrating piping plovers occur throughout the refuge’s open beach habitats from March through September (Figure 3a). • Red knots use refuge salt marshes, open beach, and tidal habitats during spring migration and summer in small numbers, and in larger numbers during fall migration from July through November, with the largest numbers occurring from mid-July through mid-October. A habitat map of red knots is not included, as they are observed throughout the refuge’s beaches, marshes, and tidal flats during migration. • Roseate terns breed on the north tip of South Monomoy Island from April through July, and migrants are observed through September on many refuge beaches and nearshore waters (Figure 3b). • Northeastern beach tiger beetles occur on the open beaches of South Monomoy Island year-round, predominantly along the Atlantic (east) side (Figure 3c). • Seabeach amaranth was out-planted along a section of South Monomoy Island’s Atlantic-facing beach in 2017 (Figure 3b), and several plants went to seed in 2018.

VII. Description of proposed action: Open portions of Monomoy NWR to hunting as follows: • Waterfowl: The hunt season would be consistent with State of Massachusetts regulations; generally open for a 1-week window in mid-October and from mid- November through mid-January. Hunting is permitted offshore by boat only. • Coyote: The hunt season would begin November 1 and extend through March 8 (or, according to the State of Massachusetts hunt season in a given year, but no later than March 10). The Atlantic-facing shoreline of South Monomoy Island would be excluded. No dogs, night hunting, or baiting would be permitted. Non- toxic shot would be recommended but not required. Single individuals or hunters in small groups would traverse areas open to hunting by foot. No mechanized equipment or wheeled devices would be permitted, and hunter numbers are anticipated to be low.

VIII. Determination of effects: a. Explanation of effects of the action on species and critical habitats in items III.a, b and c: • For proposed coyote hunting, there would be very limited overlap between hunters and plovers (possibly early March, but before nesting occurs) and red knots (during early November, the tail end of migration). • There would be no spatial or temporal overlap with roseate terns and the proposed hunting plan. • As the Atlantic-facing beaches would be closed to hunting, there would be minimal spatial overlap with northeastern beach tiger beetles (overlap would include the Nantucket Sound-facing beach from the south tip of South Monomoy Island extending approximately 1 km to the northwest, Figure 3c). • The seabeach amaranth out-planting area remains closed to public entry. The closure will continue as long as plants are present. As all Atlantic- facing beaches and nearshore dune systems would be closed to hunting, there would be no spatial overlap with seabeach amaranth and the proposed hunting plan.

b. Explanation of actions to be implemented to reduce adverse effects:

Because the hunt plan, with the seasons and locations proposed, already takes into consideration the presence of protected species, including the five aforementioned threatened and endangered species as well as a large pinniped colony throughout the Atlantic-facing shoreline, no additional actions are needed to reduce adverse effects to federally listed species under current conditions. Should conditions change, the hunt plan would be amended accordingly.

There would be no overlap between the proposed hunt plan and roseate terns or seabeach amaranth, and only very limited temporal overlap with the piping plover, red knot, and northeastern beach tiger beetle. Any effects of hunters on these species would be negligible, as hunter numbers are expected to be low due to challenging access conditions, particularly during the late fall/winter when hunting would take place. Additionally, the hunt season would take place only at the extreme ends of bird migration, so relatively few migrating individuals would be present. Breeding would not be affected for any species.

Overwintering beetles are inactive and remain burrowed high up on the beach during the coyote hunt season, and there is only a 1 km section of beach where any spatial overlap for this species would occur (Figure 3c).

IX. Effect determination and response requested:

A. Listed species/ critical habitats: Determination Response requested

No Effect

Species: Roseate tern, seabeach amaranth Concurrence______X______

Is Not Likely to Adversely Effect:

Species: Piping plover, red knot, Northeastern beach tiger beetle Concurrence______X______

Is Likely to Adversely Effect:

Species:______Concurrence______

B. Proposed species/ critical habitats: Determination Response requested

No Effect

Species:______Concurrence______

Is Not Likely to Adversely Effect:

Species:______Concurrence______

Is Likely to Adversely [jeopardize/modify habitat] Effect:

Species:______Concurrence______

VII. Reviewing ESO Evaluation:

A. Concurrence______Nonconcurrence______

B. Formal Consultation Required______

C. Conference Required______

D. Remarks [Attach additional pages as needed]:

______Signature [Title/Office of ESO Field Supervisor] Date

Figure 1. Proposed waterfowl hunting area in the waters west of South Monomoy Island, Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, Chatham, MA.

Figure 2. Proposed coyote hunting area, Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, Chatham, MA.

Figure 3a. Piping plover nest locations, 2017. Nest distribution is characteristic of general plover nesting patterns over the past 5 years.

Figure 3b. Approximate locations of the tern colony (in blue), where all roseate tern nesting has occurred on the refuge for the past 5 years, and 2017 outplanting area for seabeach amaranth (in red).

Figure 3c. Northeastern beach tiger beetle index count, 29 July, 2018, from the Lighthouse Boat Landing (Monomoy NWR) to South Beach (Town of Chatham).